tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post3874103821679217610..comments2024-02-24T05:19:10.949-05:00Comments on Durham-in-Wonderland: The 4th Circuit (Essentially) Gives Durham a Free Passkcjohnson9http://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comBlogger90125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-41136733315059652752014-03-03T04:10:25.592-05:002014-03-03T04:10:25.592-05:00Why are the lacross players suing in federal court...Why are the lacross players suing in federal court? Would state court not have been a better venue?JWilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09039395967348923629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-15341870563781675732013-01-20T20:24:55.590-05:002013-01-20T20:24:55.590-05:00" I wish those athletes who didn't have a...<i>" I wish those athletes who didn't have anything happen to them had not been so eager to go after the money. Their greed (probably the wrong word)really confused matters . . . At least I know the difference between being right and being wronged and going after something for the money versus the principal."</i><br /><br />(Perhaps not, since you seem to think these players were just in it for the money...)<br /><br />I expect that to be a talking point from the defendants also, since there really is nothing much else they can say by way of defending themselves. (MOO)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-20194308017657692202013-01-20T02:40:39.196-05:002013-01-20T02:40:39.196-05:00It's simply astonishing to see this case fall ...It's simply astonishing to see this case fall apart. And after so many years too! Frankly, I've always worried Ekstrand's over-the-top prose and not so admirable writing style could do them all but the fact that not a single one of the lawyers [prevailed is sad to see. I guess we ought to get ready to hear the same rulings on the Duke cases? What do you think KC? And IMO there's no real hope that the Supreme Court will take this, these lawyers just did not have a case that would merit anything other than our outrage. I wish those athletes who didn't have anything happen to them had not been so eager to go after the money. Their greed (probably the wrong word)really confused matters for the four who had to be declared innocent. Now with the legal rulings stacking up against us all we have is our outrage--yes, have been reading LS. Didn't one of the 88 write something about justice vs. feelings? Even so, I'll keep my outrage. At least I know the difference between being right and being wronged and going after something for the money versus the principal. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-74178758665485128492013-01-16T10:45:52.440-05:002013-01-16T10:45:52.440-05:00To Chris Halkides: Perhaps the judge is correct th...To Chris Halkides: Perhaps the judge is correct that an action under state law for constructive fraud is plausible. I have my doubts, but, for the sake of argument, assume he is correct. In order to succeed, however, the plaintiff bringing the action must show that the "fraud" caused the plaintiff damages. I fail to see any damages here. The laxers disregarded the "advice" of Dean Sue and quickly got their own lawyers. It will be extremely difficult to show that the "fraud" had any effect on them at all. As I have said before, her advice was idiotic but in the end would appear to have been of no real consequence. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-88130207831096151882013-01-14T22:20:00.018-05:002013-01-14T22:20:00.018-05:00The Duke Chronicle quoted Judge Beaty's ruling...<a href="http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/judge-lets-duke-lacrosse-suits-proceed" rel="nofollow">The Duke Chronicle</a> quoted Judge Beaty's ruling: "'An administrator who is a lawyer, who discusses pending criminal charges with her students, who affirmatively cuts them off from other advice by telling them not to seek legal advice and not to tell their parents, and who then directs them to the institution’s attorney in an effort to protect the institution at the students’ expense, could plausibly be liable for constructive fraud under state law,' the judge wrote regarding Wasiolek’s alleged actions." According to this article, constructive fraud is deception without intent.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-16304734674737453472013-01-13T16:07:11.905-05:002013-01-13T16:07:11.905-05:00Wonderland:
We thought we should make it known th...Wonderland:<br /><br />We thought we should make it known that Thavolia "DNA results; we are moving backwards" Glymph will be lecturing here at the U of ILL as a part of (of all things) "Inclusive Illinois" Iniative. Ironic that someone with so little regard for important legal documents, like the U.S. Constitution, will be taken part ina celebration of "freedom" and the Emancipation Proclamation.<br /><br />http://www.news-gazette.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/community-events/2013-01-13/ui-campus-mark-150th-anniversary-document.ht<br /><br />Hound No. 2<br />The Hounds of TASSers'villeThe Hounds of TASSers'villehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03390784090093170549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-50613673717804221492013-01-12T16:29:05.212-05:002013-01-12T16:29:05.212-05:00"didn't one of the earlier comments on th...<i>"didn't one of the earlier comments on this thread point out that the City of Durham had appointed a commission to investigate the handling of the case by the City, the police and the DA? . . .Don't I recall correctly that, as a result of the cases being filed, the commission's inquiry was halted?"</i><br /><br />Why halt it, if the city was innocent and had nothing to hide? Why not get that information out as soon as possible? Why not vindicate themselves to the public?<br /><br /><i>"Thus, years later thanks to these ridiculous cases, your desire for a search for answers has probably been irretrievably lost."</i><br /><br />Durham didn't preserve its records? Even though it's involved in litigation?<br /><br /><i>" Admittedly, we'll never know what that commission would have found."</i><br /><br />Willis Whichard gave us a preview when he said that the April 4 ID session was "not an ID session". I think we can guess where he would have come down on the issue of defendants' rights and prosecutorial and police abuse. (MOO)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-31094992683359078752013-01-12T16:22:27.238-05:002013-01-12T16:22:27.238-05:00" You ask what has been solved in Durham and ...<i>" You ask what has been solved in Durham and ask about the passage of a speedy trial law. What possible relevance is that to the lax case. . . "</i><br /><br />Prosecutorial abuse, such as Nifong demonstrated, has to be reigned in. The players have nothing personal at stake in attempting to reform the NC and Durham legal systems; they are trying to put to use what the case taught them and bring some good out of it; it comes from a sense of trying to help out the next victim of the system. And the people there--especially the rights groups-- ought to be supportive of their efforts.<br /><br />If they don't want to support those efforts, and if future NC defendants have to be subject to prosecutorial abuse, then that will be what the people of NC have chosen for themselves; and in a larger sense, that will really be "justice", since that is what they willingly inflicted on others and refused to correct when offered the chance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-87549783453250791142013-01-12T16:07:14.428-05:002013-01-12T16:07:14.428-05:00" you want the Feds to protect the indicted p...<i>" you want the Feds to protect the indicted player's "Constitutional rights." My point was that the Feds have no interest in coming in to protect someone unless that person has been materially injured."</i><br /><br />So if a black man is charged with a crime that never happened, has the klan rally outside his home and make death threats against him inside a courtroom, has a DA arouse sentiment against him because of his race, has the Aryan Nations distributing pictures of him with the expression, "Justice will be done", has a DA who conceals evidence, etc.--the feds will not become involved? I think they'd become involved in about two seconds.<br /><br /><br /><i>"Yes, the indicted players suffered an unbelievable series of unfortunate events."</i><br /><br />They weren't "unfortunate events". They were part of a deliberate attempt to frame innocent persons, under color of law. That comes under federal jurisdiction and is a part of the civil rights laws which the feds are supposed to enforce.<br /><br /><i>"But, get real, they were exonerated, the DA was disbarred and they got a monetary settlement."</i><br /><br />The DA should have been sent to prison, not given one day in jail. And that exoneration doesn't mean that every time the term Duke lacrosse is used, it still doesn't bring up associations with the lies of 2006. <br /><br /><i>" Every decision to take remedial action has costs-- dollars are spent by the Feds, time is devoted by Justice Department lawyers, other opportunities can't be pursued etc."</i><br /><br />Ditto for every case the feds pursue, including cold cases 40 years old. (What reason is there to follow through with those cases, which wouldn't apply even more to the lacrosse case?) If Durham is ever to have a valid and functioning justice system, the root of the corruption there, and a judicial system which permits it, have to be corrected. That's the feds' job, and they are remiss not to have begun.<br /><br /> <i>"There was absolutely no chance that the Feds would devote resources to protecting the "rights" of exonerated white guys who were ably represented by counsel and who received a monetary settlement. Welcome to the real world"</i><br /><br />The feds are supposed to guarantee equal protection of the laws. White students have the same civil rights as everyone else, last time I looked. And when those rights are violated under color of law, then the feds have the legal duty to intervene.<br /><br />If you want to go to a two-tier citizenship model, I suppose we can do that. But we aren't there yet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-28148292139897552912013-01-12T15:49:48.369-05:002013-01-12T15:49:48.369-05:00" so the answer to my question is "No, I...<i>" so the answer to my question is "No, I have no reason to believe that getting indicted will effect you for the rest of one's life. But, let's bring a lawsuit and after years of delay and wasted time and money, we might find an answer." </i><br /><br />I think the answer to that is self-evident; of course a false rape accusation will affect you for the rest of your life. It's devastating. Being pilloried in the media for a year, and having your school abandon you as quickly as possible, and seeing your coach fired,<br />will also affect 20-something year olds for the rest of their lives. <br /><br />Any other supposition is not credible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-33191617769058376372013-01-12T15:44:30.696-05:002013-01-12T15:44:30.696-05:00"To Anonymous at 10:32: you ask "how can...<i>"To Anonymous at 10:32: you ask "how can we know anything" when no testimony has been taken. I think that the substance of my comment was to call into question your conclusory statement about the effect of being indicted. You would appear to be seriously retreating."</i><br /><br />You haven't heard from the players and their families about the extent of the damage--emotional and financial--from the false charges.<br /><br />You won't hear that until depositions or a trial.<br /><br />Hence, the jury (figuratively and literally) is still out on that one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-46597898606426398622013-01-12T15:41:51.559-05:002013-01-12T15:41:51.559-05:00"To anonymous at 11:20 pm: you state that Duk...<br /><i>"To anonymous at 11:20 pm: you state that Duke should have a chance to prove its innocence and ditto Durham . You seem to have the legal system 180 degrees backward-- in civil litigation, the plaintiff has to prove the responsibility of the defendant. Durham and Duke want the cases dismissed; they have no interest in proving their innocence."</i><br /><br />I was using sarcasm in a paraphrase of Brodhead, who said that the accused lacrosse players should have a chance to prove their innocence in court.<br /><br />(You wouldn't think Duke has a law school and law faculty, would you?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-16854071440802225222013-01-09T23:47:53.471-05:002013-01-09T23:47:53.471-05:00To Anonymous at 10:32: you ask "how can we kn...To Anonymous at 10:32: you ask "how can we know anything" when no testimony has been taken. I think that the substance of my comment was to call into question your conclusory statement about the effect of being indicted. You would appear to be seriously retreating. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-78814017100412494992013-01-07T21:44:35.055-05:002013-01-07T21:44:35.055-05:00Is 12:50 a Communist?Is 12:50 a Communist?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-74475322636037302312013-01-07T20:14:14.559-05:002013-01-07T20:14:14.559-05:00To Anonymous at 11:10: didn't one of the earli...To Anonymous at 11:10: didn't one of the earlier comments on this thread point out that the City of Durham had appointed a commission to investigate the handling of the case by the City, the police and the DA? Don't I also recall that one of the indicted players' counsel (Chesire if I recall correctly) had just gone before the commission and had given testimony when the civil cases were filed? Don't I recall correctly that, as a result of the cases being filed, the commission's inquiry was halted? Thus, years later thanks to these ridiculous cases, your desire for a search for answers has probably been irretrievably lost. Admittedly, we'll never know what that commission would have found. But we know, for sure, that since these stupid cases were filed, nothing of substance has been revealed. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-56175636860824029202013-01-07T19:56:44.375-05:002013-01-07T19:56:44.375-05:00To Aninymous at 11:34: how about trying to stay on...To Aninymous at 11:34: how about trying to stay on point? You ask what has been solved in Durham and ask about the passage of a speedy trial law. What possible relevance is that to the lax case. For God's sake, the indicted players case had nothing to do with the lack of a speedy trial. You follow that with a reference to the need for recordings of police interrogations. Seriously, as far as I know, the indicted players were not interrogated by the police and their case, therefor, had nothing to do with that. You then indicate that you have an interest in reforming the "visible chein of command." Wonderful idea, I guess, but of little relevance to the lawsuit. I note that, of course, getting a speedy trial law and requiring police interrogations to be recorded is something that can be achieved legislatively and, as far as I know, no one has claimed that the lax case is indicative of a disenfranchisement of the people of North Carolina. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-83366087258872767272013-01-07T19:44:00.438-05:002013-01-07T19:44:00.438-05:00To anonymous at 11:20 pm: you state that Duke sho...To anonymous at 11:20 pm: you state that Duke should have a chance to prove its innocence and ditto Durham . You seem to have the legal system 180 degrees backward-- in civil litigation, the plaintiff has to prove the responsibility of the defendant. Durham and Duke want the cases dismissed; they have no interest in proving their innocence. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-78221986545571819092013-01-07T19:37:32.310-05:002013-01-07T19:37:32.310-05:00Tito Anonymous at 10:28: you want the Feds to prot...Tito Anonymous at 10:28: you want the Feds to protect the indicted player's "Constitutional rights." My point was that the Feds have no interest in coming in to protect someone unless that peron has been materially injured. Yes, the indicted players suffered an unbelievable series of unfortunate events. But, get real, they were exonerated, the DA was disbarred and they got a monetary settlement. Every decision to take remedial action has costs-- dollars are spent by the Feds, time is devoted by Justice Department lawyers, other opportunities can't be pursued etc. There was absolutely no chance that the Feds would devote resources to protecting the "rights" of exonerated white guys who were ably represented by counsel and who received a monetary settlement. Welcome to the real world Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-84245061838392867252013-01-07T19:28:18.874-05:002013-01-07T19:28:18.874-05:00To Anonymous at 10:32: so the answer to my questio...To Anonymous at 10:32: so the answer to my question is "No, I have no reason to believe that getting indicted will effect you for the rest of one's life. But, let's bring a lawsuit and after years of delay and wasted time and money, we might find an answer." Reminds me of Nancy Pelosi's comment when challenged that Congress had not read the Obama Care bill. Her response was to the effect: "let's pass it and find out what it provides." That was utterly stupid. Your comments, close to utterly stupid. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-77162562906015354592013-01-07T14:42:22.191-05:002013-01-07T14:42:22.191-05:00KC:
I dropped by to see what the latest findings ...KC:<br /><br />I dropped by to see what the latest findings were on the lacrosse suit. I read your analysis and subsequent responses with great interest. Please allow me to add a comments.<br /><br />1. A great deal of effort has gone into the initiation and maintenance of the blog. From a legal standpoint, that effort appears to have been wasted. <br /><br />However, I found your analysis, conciseness and use of the English language to be extraordinary. It was a source of great enjoyment.<br /><br />2. I believe the minority community has a better chance of obtaining a favorable verdict in these civil rights cases than do white plaintiffs. I don't think that was given proper weight by the attorneys.<br /><br />3. When action by the courts is diluted or denied, other avenues are available. (If change needs to happen, are people so powerless they cannot organize to effect change?) Duke (and other universities) need support organizations to defend those that are unjustly accused. Does Brooklyn College have such a group?<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />Ken <br />DallasAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-70414221286344688402013-01-06T12:12:15.974-05:002013-01-06T12:12:15.974-05:00An eery echo of the past is now being heard in Ste...An eery echo of the past is now being heard in Steubenville, Ohio. The question is, which past?<br /><br />Two 16 year old boys are charged with rape of another 16 year old. They are football players, members of a popular football team loved by the local community. <br /><br />Other football players joked about it on video. The video was leaked by a hacker (as I said, eery).<br /><br />A crowd of 1000, many anonymous, led by an anonymous leader wearing a hood and mask, is demanding more arrests. The local sheriff says no, the two who are charged are the only ones for which there is evidence of a crime. The protesters claim the sheriff is just protecting the football program.<br /><br />The question is, which history are we reliving? Duke or Penn State?<br /><br />We learned from Duke you cannot just charge people with crimes when there is no evidence they committed the crimes. We learned from Penn State that responsible people will turn their eyes from what they do not want to see to protect a beloved football program.<br /><br />The indicia I can see so far suggest the local police are pursuing justice. Two are already charged. The Sheriff, who apparently oversees cases like this, has a history of prosecuting rape cases (200 so far). Nearly 70 witnesses have been interviewed by local police. No one yet is shown to have any personal motive not to pursue justice.<br /><br />So, I lean to this being a Duke-like howl from a lynch mob. But, I will keep my mind open and alert to what is going on.<br /><br />Jim PetersonJim In San Diegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06959286127760699852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-11043529878446490962013-01-03T21:46:36.023-05:002013-01-03T21:46:36.023-05:00Gee 12:50, you really got called out for your comm...Gee 12:50, you really got called out for your comments. We await your reply. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-15031220303900688862013-01-03T10:32:57.475-05:002013-01-03T10:32:57.475-05:00"you mention that getting indicted for gang r...<i>"you mention that getting indicted for gang rape will effect you for the rest of your life.do you have any reason to believe that the indicted players are "effected" now?"</i><br /><br />How can we know anything about that when no testimony has yet been allowed to be taken?<br /><br />Let's get all the testimony taken and then decide whether or not there was actual harm.<br /><br />(No court can decide that before seeing the evidence, can it?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-14431419536227793762013-01-03T10:28:50.558-05:002013-01-03T10:28:50.558-05:00"Kind of hard to think that we need the Feder...<i>"Kind of hard to think that we need the Federal courts to come in and reform the Durham cops, the DA etc. when no one got convicted based on discrimination."</i><br /><br />The entire prosecution against them was based on their being white out-of-state rich athletes, not on anything they did. They were considered guilty on the basis of stereotypes. And that is a parallel to what happened in the South during segregation--guilt by stereotype (regardless of the facts). <br /><br />If defendants are denied a fair process because of who they are (and not what they are accused of doing), then the feds ought to step in to protect their constitutional rights.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-30515824913560221842013-01-02T23:34:19.707-05:002013-01-02T23:34:19.707-05:00"you note that the DOJ and the FBI did not in...<i>"you note that the DOJ and the FBI did not investigate and conclude that that fact justifies the lawsuit. Perhaps they declined to investigate because they did not think they needed to expend their resources investigating how three guys who were indicted were completely exonerated by the NC Attorney General and received a settlement from Duke."</i><br /><br />And witness intimidation, false warrants, frame-ups of innocent persons, don't warrant investigations and prosecutions because the accused managed to escape conviction?<br /><br /><i>" Seriously, outside forces intervene only in circumstances where the conduct at issue can't be resolved locally."</i> <br /><br />And what's been fixed in Durham? Got a speedy trial law yet? Transcripts of grand jury proceedings? Guarantee of probable cause hearings? Recordings of police interrogations? A visible chain of command in the DPD? <br /><br />Nothing's been done to prevent the next lacrosse case, or protect the next defendants.<br /><br /><i>"Here the conduct was resolved locally-- The NC Attorney General exonerated the players, the NC Bar disbarred the DA, Duke gave the indicted players a settlement, the media published the story, KC wrote a book. What exactly did you want the DOJ or the FBI to do?"</i><br /><br />How about arresting those involved and prosecuting them for violating the civil rights of the falsely-accused? Usually that's what happens when one commits a crime--it's not just, let's let bygones be bygones...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com