home

Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With Third Player

Leaks are coming out on a second round of DNA tests. Reports are that DNA from a third player "is consistent with" DNA found on tissue under a fingernail in the trash.

Even if true, it doesn't establish a rape. It could have happened from contact during a scuffle over the money, or during a lap dance while she was dancing. It could have been a secondary transfer. The players have said the accuser was painting her nails in the bathroom. Nails were found in the living room where the dancing occurred.

As to the "consistent with" which does not mean a complete match,

A DNA expert said Wednesday that one way a DNA report sometimes says DNA is "consistent" with a particular person is when there's a partial DNA profile of fewer than all 13 genetic markers commonly used in testing kits.

In that case, the number of markers available determines the reliability of the match, said Theodore D. Kessis, owner of Applied DNA Resources in Columbus, Ohio.

"It really depends then upon how partial is that profile," he said in a telephone interview. "A lot of people are of the opinion, including myself, that if it's supposed to test for 13, it should get 13, and something less than 13 is starting to hinge on the reliability of the result.

The completeness of the DNA test isn't really the issue. Let's assume it is a match for the third player. How does it establish a rape? It's really an issue that goes to her credibility. Does it mean she was telling the truth? Does it rule out that she got angry at them for forcefully taking the money back and later decided to allege a rape?

And if the DNA tests aren't due back until Monday, who's leaking this finding?

< Bush: "We're Not Trolling Your Privacy" | Report: Aircraft Carriers Headed towards Iran, Possibly for Air Strike >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu May 11, 2006 at 03:28:07 PM EST
    RE: "scientists concluded it came from the same genetic pool" For example, Finn or Ashk-Jew or Irish.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#2)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Thu May 11, 2006 at 03:30:32 PM EST
    DNA on a tissue? On a tissue under a fingernail in the trash? Or on tissue under the fingernail?

    azbballfan posted:
    Again, I'm very suprised that no-one is making a bigger deal over how the Duke Administration tipped off the team that the Durham Police were investigating this. It's a sign that the Duke family was looking to take care of it's own.
    The players' parents are upset that they didn't do more. They didn't stop the three captains from "going downtown" and almost ten days later they helped arrange that mass interview that was cancelled. They publically asked the players to cooperate.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#4)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Thu May 11, 2006 at 03:33:15 PM EST
    Some of you familiar with the photo identification, explain this: "WRAL-TV, citing a transcript of the photo identification session the dancer had with police, reported Wednesday that she indicated a fourth player also may have been involved in assaulting her." We're not moving up to four assailants, are we? If so, what would that mean?

    DNA on a tissue? On a tissue under a fingernail in the trash? Or on tissue under the fingernail?
    skin tissue under a fingernail I think

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#6)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Thu May 11, 2006 at 03:38:08 PM EST
    If I knew that the police were investigating a rape and I was involved, I would have gotten rid of all her stuff, including fingernails, got the money out of there, and tossed her makeup bag in a landfill. Does this mean that none of the people living at the house were involved? Didn't know anything happened? What?

    Orinoco posted:
    TL, what do you think the latest arrest of Mostafa say of Nifong? At what time would his unethical behavior cross the line?
    Another prominent attorney on TV just said the DA is "between a rock and a hard place - if there is an outstanding warrant it has to be served. If they don't it looks like favoritism."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu May 11, 2006 at 03:45:28 PM EST
    In "The Secret House : The Extraordinary Science of an Ordinary Day" author David Bodanis says that most household dust is actually dried flakes of human skin tissue. So I'm still not sure exactly what is meant by the assertion that they found DNA skin tissue under one of the AV's fingernails?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#11)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Thu May 11, 2006 at 03:50:10 PM EST
    Teresa, Teresa, Teresa, I have been reading for a couple of months that the two women met and entered the house together. Where did that come from?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#12)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Thu May 11, 2006 at 03:51:42 PM EST
    Sgt. York, In your considered opinion, then, is WRAL talking out of their collective ass about four assailants?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#13)
    by chew2 on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:01:01 PM EST
    Bob, Go back to the last thread: the link to the complete AV identification transcript is post there. You missed it. Orinoco, So how come you aren't you complaining about Nifong arresting Kim Roberts the second dancer? Selective outrage?
    Because there was a warrant for her arrest, Roberts told police she picked up the woman on the road, in a crowd of men yelling racial slurs. Police did not ask her name, and Roberts went home. A week later, Roberts' escort agency told her police wanted to talk to her about a possible rape. After she gave a statement, police arrested her for the probation violation.


    SLOphoto posted:
    If someone knows -- BTW -- Just how much DNA could be found under her fingernail if the AV had grazed her finger against the lax player who handed her the mixed drink? I don't know, I'm just asking?
    I don't know, but if was that easy I would think DNA would have been found under all of her nails. For the people that think the skin flakes may have fallen onto the nails while in the trash - try this: Take a paring knife and scrape the surface of a lemon. See the zest curled up on the knife? Now using a fresh knife do it again. Wipe the knife off and drop the zest back onto the clean knife. Compare the two knives. Hopefully, they took a photo of the nail before removing the tissue.

    RE: "four assailants" Seems to come from the accuser fingering #4, #5, $7, and #40. ----------- Reports are that the skin tissue, attached to the fake fingernail, found in the bathroom trashcan, and "from the same genetic pool" of... is consistent with one of the team captians who lives at that house. These are Matt Zash, Dan Flannery and Dave Evans.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#16)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:05:21 PM EST
    Rereading the story about the taxi driver being arrested, it's not clear he even knew that there was an outstanding misdemeanor indictment out on him, although apparently there was. It may be an unfortunate coincidence, but asking him if he had anything else to say about the rape case right before the cuffs went on would be suspicious to most of us. +++ I keep hearing defense attorneys say that Roberts changed her story after she was arrested by Nifong, but as far as to what she observed that night, has she really changed her story? She's changed her opinion as to whether or not a rape occurred, but I do that a dozen times a day. What has changed other than her opinion?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#17)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:06:34 PM EST
    Teresa, Teresa, Teresa, I have been reading for a couple of months that the two women met and entered the house together. Where did that come from?
    Mr. Bissey, I think?

    Also, IMAGE 5 is the 90% guy. Sgt: "Percentage wise, what is the likelihood this is one of the gentlemen who assaulted you?" Victim: About 90%. [link deleted, not in html format]

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#18)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:09:01 PM EST
    Bob:
    If I knew that the police were investigating a rape and I was involved, I would have gotten rid of all her stuff, including fingernails, got the money out of there, and tossed her makeup bag in a landfill.
    Yes, that's what you would do. But these are college aged guys. The Duke Administration had also reported to them that the Police Department wasn't taking the AV seriously. IMHO - I find it strange that the parents wanted the University to do more for the kids. Did they want the University to take action in order to obstruct justice? Strangely, there are people out there who believe that if you pay an institution to educate your kids, you are responsible for protecting them at all costs. The University also has a responsibility to the local community. This is part of the challenge faced by private schools everywhere. Interestingly, at the UC schools, the campus police are state cops with the highest level of jurisdiction. At the state schools, the students know their conduct is held to a higher standard for social responsibility.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:09:40 PM EST
    Yes, skin tissue. Here are the four: IMAGE 4 "He looked like [edited] but I'm not sure." "One of the guys that assaulted me." IMAGE 5 "He looks like one of the guys who assaulted me sort." "He looks just like him without the mustache." IMAGE 7 (Reade Seligmann) "He looks like one of the guys who assaulted me." "100%" "Yes." IMAGE 40 (Collin Finnerty) "He is the guy who asaulted me." "He put his peni* in my anu* and my vagin*."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#19)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:10:05 PM EST
    Reports are that the skin tissue, attached to the fake fingernail, found in the bathroom trashcan, and "from the same genetic pool" of... is consistent with one of the team captians who lives at that house. These are Matt Zash, Dan Flannery and Dave Evans.
    Where did you here that? I don't think it's Dan because didn't she identify him as the one who paid her and not the one who assaulted her? I might be wrong on that but I assume the guy she id'd as the money guy was a captain since he did the arrangements.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#20)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:11:58 PM EST
    hear, not here. Dang this sinus crap is messing with my spelling.

    TL wrote:
    And if the DNA tests aren't due back until Monday, who's leaking this finding?
    I suspect that Nifong has had the result of the second DNA testing much earlier when a few days ago the news mentioned that the AV's family said that the DA has good news for them. I think this case bothers me a lot not because the boys are white and privilege and the AV is a black stripper, but really that it's so hard to determine whether the prosecution is seeking for the truth or just winning and proving himself.

    RE: "What has changed other than her opinion?" We don't know exactly. It seems that her initial story was that she was in the bathroom with the accuser and then later waited outside in the car as the accuser briefly went back in the house to retrieve her shoe. Later, the story seems to change and instead of the bathroom the two go out to the car (rather than to the bathroom) and are coaxed back in where they are separated and Kim spends twenty inutes searching for the accuser. However, this is all second-hand at this point.

    I don't know what others think, but I think the timing of this "leaking" is interesting. It probably implies that the 3rd player will be charged on Monday.

    Bob in Pacifica posted:
    I keep hearing defense attorneys say that Roberts changed her story after she was arrested by Nifong, but as far as to what she observed that night, has she really changed her story? She's changed her opinion as to whether or not a rape occurred, but I do that a dozen times a day. What has changed other than her opinion?
    Nothing that I can think of.

    azbballfan posted:
    Again, I'm very suprised that no-one is making a bigger deal over how the Duke Administration tipped off the team that the Durham Police were investigating this. It's a sign that the Duke family was looking to take care of it's own.
    Your conjecture is completely absurd. No one is making a bigger deal about it because there is nothing there at all...except in your paranoid mind. 1. The Police give the heads up to people all the time when they are investigating, often asking peole to come in for a chat about an event. 2. If the Durham Police thought they needed the element of surprise they would not have asked Duke to organize the sit down. 3. The Durham PD wanted to interview the team as a whole, obviously they wanted the administration to do the leg work to organize it, and obviously they would know that the administration would inform the players of why. 4. It is utterly unreasonable for the Durham PD to think or expect Duke to maintain some kind of secrecy on PD's behalf. No one has complained that they were "tipped off" and spoiled the investigation. The Durham PD has not lodged that complaint, just you. 5. How do you know that Duke didn't say to the lax team "the Durham PD wants talk to you boys about the party and the strippers." You don't! 6. The three captains had met with the Durham PD for 8 hours well before the team meeting was organized...at least a week. Gee whiz....maybe, just maybe, in the WEEK in between the planned meeting and the interview the CAPTAINS of the team told the team what they were asked about for 8 hours!!!. Nah, that's completely unreasonable....the reasonable explanation is that the Duke family is taking care of its own.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#26)
    by chew2 on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:20:04 PM EST
    TL
    The completeness of the DNA test isn't really the issue. Let's assume it is a match for the third player. How does it establish a rape? It's really an issue that goes to her credibility. Does it mean she was telling the truth?
    Good points. It doesn't show sexual contact. It does bolster her credibility about the struggle, but the defendant's can claim it was a struggle over money. So what crime could they be charged with? Misdemeanor assault or robbery? Of course, some of their attorneys have made vague statements that "nothing happened". But that doesn't foreclose some of them from now claiming there was a scuffle somewhere.
    Does it rule out that she got angry at them for forcefully taking the money back and later decided to allege a rape?
    The one problem with this is that she was allegedly passed out or impaired after leaving the party, and when she regained some composure at the ER she was "hysterical" about a rape and assault having occurred. Doesn't sound like she "made up the story" at that time to "get back at them" for taking the money back. Maybe for assaulting her.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#27)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:21:08 PM EST
    I don't know what others think, but I think the timing of this "leaking" is interesting. It probably implies that the 3rd player will be charged on Monday.
    I think so too. I'd bet money on it. I wonder if there is a possibility that this is the police source that the detective on Fox referred to? Probably not, but this DNA evidence however small, might get a few to talk and at least give more details.

    On the source, defense lawyers say the tests aren't back yet.
    Defense attorneys did say that they are not sure where the Herald-Sun got its information. They do know that Nifong has not gotten the DNA report back because he has to hand over the results to them as soon as he gets them.
    Did a lab employee squeal?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#29)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:31:45 PM EST
    Sgt. York, is it normal to interview three guys for 24 hours with very little evidence? This seems like, at least by then, her charge was being taken very seriously.

    Kalidoggie posted:
    Posted by Kalidoggie May 10, 2006 01:03 PM
    Going back to the last thread.....
    Pat, excellent post. Nifong has bothered me the most about this case.
    In addition to your statements, either the Durham Sun or N&O stated that Nifong contacted them and insisted that they write the story about the DNA tests, which we all know started the media storm.
    Kalidoggie, I asked for your source, but you didn't answer, yet. Is this your source? More questions about the lacrosse story
    Another is that The N&O didn't confect this story. The paper was the first to report that DNA tests had been ordered, but Nifong instigated that action. Much of the coverage since has been about developments in the case -- rallies and protests by residents, Nifong's very public insistence that a crime occurred, the players' lawyers' equally vehement claims of innocence, Duke's actions against the team and coach. In other words, reporting the news.


    Yes, it's tissue under the fingernail. I changed the post to reflect that. I heard it on Abrams and it sounded like they were talking about the tissue lying under the fingernail in the trash. I couldn't figure out if it was a paper tissue or not. When they started talking about "secondary transfer" I figured it was a paper tissue. News reports indicate it's human tissue under the fingernail. I haven't seen any reports linking it to the players who lived in the house.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#32)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:36:32 PM EST
    Kalidoggie: Your points on Duke's cooperation with the investigation after the players stopped cooperating are well taken. My point is that the Duke Administration tipped off the team about an investigation two days before the Durham police served them with a search warrant. It was inapropriate for the University to interfere in an open police investigation. After they realized their mistake, they tried to cover this mistake by asking the boys to cooperate. But this was too little too late as the boys already had secured representation which wouldn't allow it.
    It is utterly unreasonable for the Durham PD to think or expect Duke to maintain some kind of secrecy on PD's behalf. No one has complained that they were "tipped off" and spoiled the investigation. The Durham PD has not lodged that complaint, just you.
    It is not utterly unreasonable. It's very reasonable to expect the University to respect the rights of the community to not interfere in open police investigations. I very much doubt that the Durham PD will file a formal complaint. I'm sure there have been and will be some heated discussions.
    How do you know that Duke didn't say to the lax team "the Durham PD wants talk to you boys about the party and the strippers." You don't!
    Yes I do. I read the Duke report. I don't have the link off hand. Let me know if you want it. The report clearly states that the lacrosse team was told about the investigation two days before the warrant. So the captains and the team had two days to corroborate before they were interviewed for 8 hours. Interestingly, during that interview, they gave a list of everyone who attended the party. A list which did not have Seligmann's name on it. When pictures were released to the media, defense attorneys started to get mad at each other. Sounds like someone's mad that everyone isn't keeping to the story.

    RE: "is it normal to interview three guys for 24 hours with very little evidence?" I don't know that this happened. When were they interviewed for 24-hours? do you mean held for 24-hours before being allowed to post bail? Before the arrest/inditement one generally asks a person to voluntarily answer quetions and I believe several students did that. After the inditement, these students already had lawyers and it's unlikely anyone waived their rights. Normally, if you arrest someone for (say) felony assualt you fill out a Probable Cause request and get it signed by a judge which would give you a 24-hour hold. You must bring the suspect before the court or release on bail before the 24-hours ends. Of course, this state could have a slightly different procedure (I was a deputy in Minnesota).

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#34)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:50:56 PM EST
    I read that the three were interviewed for 24 hours total, 8 hours each. I was curious about the captains' interviews.

    AZ wrote:
    Interestingly, at the UC schools, the campus police are state cops with the highest level of jurisdiction. At the state schools, the students know their conduct is held to a higher standard for social responsibility.
    Interstingly the UC schools are state schools run by CA, hence the state cops. By the way, all the professors and support staff are state employees as well. The state school is part of the state, thus the state's jurisdiction. Also of interest is that private schools have private property and private security...just like any other private citizen, as such there would be no need to have state cops. As for the higher social standard of state school. I guess all those girls gone wild from ASU, UC-Santa Barbara and UCSD were living up to a higher standard of social behavior. Or are you saying they know it but ignore it. The reality is the opposite. It is more difficult to expel a student from a state school/public school for bad behavior than any private school. All government adminsitered/sponsored school must provide due process (i.e., notice and comment) before taking away a government benefit. There is no requirement in a private school because the students are merely paying guests of the private university. Ryan Mcfadden is a prime example. He was suspended by Duke summarily. At a state school, he would have been entitled to a hearing at the very least and would have never been suspended a minute.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#36)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 04:53:55 PM EST
    Sgt. York: Maybe someone else can help us here. I thought there was discussion about using the 24 hour hold period and speculation as to why it wasn't used. Wasn't it because the police didn't want to place all the lacrosse players under a 24 hour hold? Also, they didn't have enough evidence at the time the search warrant was issued to get a judge to hold the residents (not enough proof that they were the ones). I had read that the players were interviewed for up to 8 hours. I wonder if the 24 hour reference comes from some simple math (8 x 3 = 24). Thanks for the information on procedures Sgt. York.

    IMHO: Yes, that was the article. The opperative sentence could be written much clearer. As the focus of the article was about reporting, I read it to mean that Nifong "instigated" the reporting of the DNA, but on a second read I can see that it could mean that Nifong instigated the DNA tests that resulted in the N&O reporting it....I assume this is what you would retort. Thanks for looking it up. I tried but could find it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#38)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Thu May 11, 2006 at 05:18:41 PM EST
    I give up. No one seems to remember where the source of the story of them both initially entering the house at the same time.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#39)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 05:18:51 PM EST
    Kalidoggie Sorry, the jurisdiction of state cops goes beyond the boundaries of the university. Unlike Duke University Police, who have no jurisdiction beyond the University and it's bordering streets. (The house happens to be across the street from the University, hence the Duke PD were checking on the license plates). The Duke University PD website states their limited jurisdiction. Thus, making them glamorized baby sitters whose purpose is to ensure that the bill payor's kids don't get hurt and don't get in trouble. Real crimes have to be referred to the Durham PD. I don't know what point you were making about the girls gone wild videos. While they don't make the girls look to be very smart, they're certainly not criminals and aren't doing anything wrong. And the University of California system does expell students for minor crimes and inappropriate behavior. Being publicly funded universities, they are subject to potential scrutiny and lawsuits from civil rights groups. However, I went through the system and know people who were expelled. Unfortunately for them, they weren't breaking the school code of conduct in an act of protest. Private schools are much more reliant upon their alumni and parents for ongoing support. They must carefully consider the ramifications of alienating a class of supporters before taking action. The outcry of some vocal Duke alumni against the University for suspending McFadden is an example. Another example is the WalMart heiress whose parents dedicated a campus building as she was accepted to USC (the Duke of the West). The University found out she was cheating but it wasn't until the gal who went to school for her went to the newspapers that the school was shamed into expelling her (and giving back the money).

    mmyy posted:
    I think this case bothers me a lot not because the boys are white and privilege and the AV is a black stripper, but really that it's so hard to determine whether the prosecution is seeking for the truth or just winning and proving himself.
    No one that knows him has questioned his ethics. For having worked in the DAs office for 27 years, he doesn't seem to have made many enemies.

    imho, if there was lemon-zest quantity skin tissue under the nail, wouldn't the state lab have been able to do the DNA match without sending it to the private lab? Or is skin tissue in itself more difficult to test? I am wondering if the Durham PD strongly supports Nifong. If they love him (which why wouldn't they, he seems to have had an unblemished and honorable career) and had objections to another candidate, they might have wanted to do all they could to make this case work in his favor.

    Kalidoggie posted:
    Yes, that was the article. The opperative sentence could be written much clearer. As the focus of the article was about reporting, I read it to mean that Nifong "instigated" the reporting of the DNA, but on a second read I can see that it could mean that Nifong instigated the DNA tests that resulted in the N&O reporting it....I assume this is what you would retort.
    Thanks for looking it up. I tried but could find it.
    Kali, I read that sentence about twenty times and could see it going either way, so I e-mailed the writer, Ted Vaden. He said he thought it could have been written clearer and that Nifong instigated the court ordered DNA tests, not the paper's coverage of it.

    Kali, p.s. when I read it the way you did, I admit it did rile me up a bit (even though I am married to Nifong - according to Orinoco). Do they have same sex marriages in N.C.?

    Del posted:
    imho, if there was lemon-zest quantity skin tissue under the nail, wouldn't the state lab have been able to do the DNA match without sending it to the private lab? Or is skin tissue in itself more difficult to test?
    I have no idea how much tissue they had. I assumed the inconclusive result they came up with the first time around was due to a mixed sample (maybe her DNA mixed with the suspect DNA). My lemon zest example could be done with a very tiny sample, one only clearly observable under magnification.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#45)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 06:03:03 PM EST
    I give up. No one seems to remember where the source of the story of them both initially entering the house at the same time.
    I think it's Bissey, Bob. I checked the warrants again and it says she arrived at the residence and "joined" the other dancer. It doesn't say they were outside.

    I'll bet that the reason for complicated testing was a small sample, the sort that people often get by gently raking someone's neck with fingernails during lap dances, slow dances, or even scuffles (which no one has ruled out). Or the complicated testing was that it is not a clear match but "consistant" (i.e. can't rule him out). If the innocence project had a DNA match of that type on a death row inmate, they'd be screaming for his release.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#47)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 06:12:51 PM EST
    Regarding the DNA testing. The initial test results were of the fluid samples taken from the AV. At the time they were announced, there were news reports of additional tests pending. Apparently CIS has the ability to do fluid tests, but not skin and hair. Fluids seem to be the quickest, then skin and hair folicles (live DNA), then hair (mitochondrial). Some of the defense team claim the fluid tests all came back negative. Now we hear speculation about the skin tests coming back positive and that the hair didn't have a folicle. I hope that covers the questions.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#48)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 06:14:20 PM EST
    Oops, should have read: "SCI"

    rogan1313 posted:
    I'll bet that the reason for complicated testing was a small sample, the sort that people often get by gently raking someone's neck with fingernails during lap dances, slow dances, or even scuffles (which no one has ruled out).
    I'll bet that the reason for complicated testing was a small sample, the sort that people often get by gently raking someone's neck with fingernails while they are being strangled.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#50)
    by chew2 on Thu May 11, 2006 at 06:46:38 PM EST
    Azbballfan,
    The initial test results were of the fluid samples taken from the AV. The initial test results were of the fluid samples taken from the AV.
    What fluids were there on the AV? Semen? The defense lawyers apparently implied there was none. So what else? Are there any reports as to what fluids?

    Oops, should have read: "SCI"
    I think it's SBI.

    If indeed this player X who has an "imperfect" match, is the one of the 3 attackers picked by accuser in the photo lineup , let's make a simple probability calculation. The probability that player X was "randomly" selected by accuser as her attacker, is: 3/46. The probability that this "imperfect" match excluded every player but him is: 1/46 The probability that he has an "imperfect" match AND randomly selected is 1/46 * 3/46 = 1/705 which means 0.14%. Wow, this player X should be a freaking unlucky guy.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#53)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 06:53:14 PM EST
    Oops, should have read: "SCI" I think it's SBI.
    lol. I'm glad I'm not the only one having typing/thinking problems tonight.

    perhaps lucky player X was the guy who tried to catch the AV when she stumbled and got his arm scratched

    Larry, Read again carefully. The odds is still 1/705 regardless how that DNA came on her nails.

    larry posted:
    perhaps lucky player X was the guy who tried to catch the AV when she stumbled and got his arm scratched
    And she mistook his galant gesture as an attempt to strangle her.

    I didnt add the probability of her nail meeting his skin tissue in the trash can.

    AZ: I don't necessarily disagree with you about alumni influence, but I would argue that it also occurs at state schools (football bosters have been doing it fo years) maybe just not as often at private schools. The issue of student/alumini behavior has nothing to do with state v. private, which you implied. I also think you have a pre-disposition to assume private schools are nefarious, but we've already been through that a few weeks ago. IMHO: That was funny. Your alleged marriage with Nifong may be in trouble though, he very well may be cheating on you with the AV.

    Hicht posted:
    I didnt add the probability of her nail meeting his skin tissue in the trash can.
    Can you run those numbers for us?;)

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#60)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 07:29:35 PM EST
    chew I'm not sure I can directly answer your question, but here's what I know. I read a SANE manual from another hospital in NC. It tells the nurse to ask for permission to take fluid swabs. Once granted, the SANE nurse is instructed to take swabs from various parts of the female anatomy. These swabs would provide the "fluid" DNA samples to take. The lab report would later tell if there was any semen present. Based upon the timeline of defense attorney announcements, I suspect that they found out all the swabs came back with no signs of semen when the initial DNA results were released to them. I don't know if anyone cares, but the SANE manual also instructs the nurse to examine under the patient's fingernails to look for dangling tissue like skin from what could have been a struggle. It instructs the nurse to collect any such tissue. What I found strange was that the manual emphatically instructed the nurse to NOT (emphasis theirs) scrape under the nails for samples. Thus, there should have been visible evidence of skin tissue for DNA tests to have been run. Hicht, thanks for the quick statistics lesson. Once you divide this by the meaningful DNA accuracy statistic, the odds of a false positive are going to be astronomical. Finally, SBI, SBI, SBI, SBI (okay, I'll do the remaining 296 offline)

    What I found strange was that the manual emphatically instructed the nurse to NOT (emphasis theirs) scrape under the nails for samples.
    I'm guessing the scraping could cause the victims dna to be commingled with the suspect DNA. In this case the S.A.N.E. nurse never got near this fingernail, it was found at the house.

    "Consistent with" on a DNA sure sounds like "might have been" to me. So what we have is that an extensive thirty minute rape yields one "might have been" of skin on one fingernail. Whatever the SBI tested (fluids?) must have had something in it, and it wasn't DNA from the 46. Was it someone else's DNA, or was there really no foreign body DNA on this woman's body, which is why the discarded fingernail is today's headline. Was there an actual scientific report released detailing what CBI did not find (i.e. no sperm) or were the results of the CBI report filtered to the press. Foreign sperm would be very bad for this case, and Nifong would do well to publicly suppress this for now, though if the CBI scientific report is available through a link I'd stand corrected. Remember--Nifong was SURE that the CBI liquid tests would find something. There are field tests that detect sperm in a lab; wouldn't the hospital or CBI have looked at the AV's vaginal fluids before doing DNA? Nifong sure didn't act like someone who would be reduced to relying on DNA accidentally found in a trashcan.

    Hicht, You wrote to Larry:
    Read again carefully. The odds is still 1/705 regardless how that DNA came on her nails.
    I'm not much good at evaluating probability models, but my assumption would be that if player x was actually scratched by the defendant, as Larry suggested, the chance that that the "imperfect" match would exclude every player but him would start to approach 1, and, the chance that the accuser could pick him randomly out of the lineup as one of her three suspects would approach 3/46... It will be interesting to see whether suspect #3 has a story to account for his dna being under the fingernail, if that winds up being what the forensics reveal, because if he doesn't I would think a mathematically minded jury might well reasonably convict him on probabilistic grounds alone.

    rogan1313,
    Whatever the SBI tested (fluids?) must have had something in it, and it wasn't DNA from the 46. Was it someone else's DNA, or was there really no foreign body DNA on this woman's body, which is why the discarded fingernail is today's headline.
    That fluid test might not include any semen sample like you are suggesting. One of the evidence picked from the house was a bottle of lubricant. It is very likely if they made a test like that they have tested lubrication in victim's body fluids.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#65)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 08:19:27 PM EST
    I love the way Tucker plays an earlier clip to hold his guest's feet to the fire and ignores his own wrong conlusions. (And I despise Wendy Murhpy.)

    I wrote:
    My assumption would be that if player x was actually scratched by the defendant, as Larry suggested, the chance that that the "imperfect" match would exclude every player but him would start to approach 1, and, the chance that the accuser could pick him randomly out of the lineup as one of her three suspects would approach 3/46...
    If player x does have a story to account for his dna winding up under the accuser's fingernails, I would think he would also not argue that his name was chosen at random by the accuser. He would argue that he was targeted. The "scuffle for money" defense, (which TL raised early on in this discussion) has as its major weakness that it doesn't account for the sexual injuries to the accuser. Proposals that have been suggested so far to account for these injuries are "what if" type proposals. Jurors don't care much for fantasy defenses. So that's the risk the players face.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#67)
    by Lora on Thu May 11, 2006 at 08:28:00 PM EST
    I wonder if anyone has looked at 90%'s arm? Also, could another different DNA test be forthcoming Monday?

    rogan1313 posted:
    Was there an actual scientific report released detailing what CBI did not find (i.e. no sperm) or were the results of the CBI report filtered to the press. Foreign sperm would be very bad for this case, and Nifong would do well to publicly suppress this for now, though if the CBI scientific report is available through a link I'd stand corrected.
    DNA clears players, lawyers say; DA vows to continue Duke inquiry
    The results, the lawyers said, show that investigators collected no genetic material of any kind from the woman. "There was no DNA found in or on her that would indicate that she recently had any sex," Cheshire said.
    I took this to mean no semen was found in or on her. The defense has had the results of the SBI lab results for a month. They selectively released the results to the public and refused media requests to release the report. The prosecution is prohibited from releasing the report.

    Hicht But the lubricant, if lubricant was found on the AV, must have something in it, even if it is little wood splinters from a broomstick :( Also, lubricant would probably dissolve at least tiny bits of latex, though maybe not enough to poke through it. Lubricant is kinda mucky-male pubic hairs or skin that comes in contact with it while thrusting (even with condom on) can be absorbed and held in place. Shouldn't there be at least SOMETHING on the person of the AV as far as DNA goes? Either Nifong was bluffing completely or he's hiding something about the first DNA testing, because he was way too sure of himself. Since he panicked into the phony ID after the first round, I'm not so sure about the bluff theory.

    PB, Reviewing more carefully my calculation is good only if people claims his DNA meet her fingernails by chance, like their earlier suggestion nails and tissue came together in the trashcan. So that calculation shows that it is very far possibility that tissue and nails came together by chance. Player X have to give a logical explaining why dancer scratched him.

    Posted by Lora:
    I wonder if anyone has looked at 90%'s arm?
    This blog: DUKE NEW SENSE CONSERVATIVE DUKE STUDENTS BLOG ON COMMUNITY AND COUNTRY copied part of this WRAL story before it was edited out and a correction was added:* Players Identified by Scratches From a local television station:
    An exotic dancer who says three Duke lacrosse players raped her may have identified two of them based on photographs that show scratches on their bodies, a defense attorney said Wednesday.
    The attorney said that when 46 members of the lacrosse team submitted court-ordered DNA samples last month, they were also photographed without their shirts.
    *- Editor's Note: A previous version of this article mistakenly cited defense attorney Bill Cotter as the source of information concerning how a woman may have identified the two men in this story. Cotter, however, was not the source of the information obtained by WRAL.


    PB, You totally confused me, That calculation in my post shows that even that "imperfect" DNA match is confidently pointing to one player. You are also agreeing with that. How his DNA came under her nail is totally different question.

    I see PB caught the headline on the Drudge Report, but it hadn't made the google cache yet: Posted by PB April 20, 2006 04:00 PM

    Hicht, You wrote:
    Reviewing more carefully my calculation is good only if people claims his DNA meet her fingernails by chance, like their earlier suggestion nails and tissue came together in the trashcan.
    Even if the DNA did meet her fingernail by chance, we really don't have a very good reason to assign the 1/46 value to that chance. It's totally unreasonable to assume that each of the 46 players had an equivalent chance of getting their dna under the accuser's fingernails. That's why suspect #3's story will be an extremely important component of his defense. If her story fits the forensic evidence too much better than his does, he'll be going down.

    Hicht, You wrote:
    You totally confused me, That calculation in my post shows that even that "imperfect" DNA match is confidently pointing to one player. You are also agreeing with that. How his DNA came under her nail is totally different question.
    Ah, you confused me first, I think. You only meant to discuss the question of whether player x might have wrongfully not been excluded along with the others by the partial dna result. I see what you're getting at, I think, and I appreciate your argument. Unlucky indeed.

    PB, There is a misunderstanding. See my latest post. That probability calculation is too show even if there is a imperfect "match", that match points to that one player with a high probability. If she scrachted her while she was falling down like Larry said and that probability approached from 1/46 to 1/1 then that 1/1 is the result that I was trying to get.

    PB, I am glad we agreed,

    Hecht, I take it back. I'm still confused... I'm closing in on understanding your claim, but I don't get this...
    The probability that this "imperfect" match excluded every player but him is: 1/46


    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#79)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 09:18:50 PM EST
    IMHO I recall a story coming out just after the quote by the defense attorney that the pictures used in the lineup were not the ones taken without their shirts. Does anyone have the articles?

    PB, They compared 46 players DNA with the unknown DNA under her nail. It mismatched 45 players, but partially matched one player. What is the probability player X is that guy that partially match is 1/46 assuming he is just unlucky.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#81)
    by chew2 on Thu May 11, 2006 at 09:33:18 PM EST
    Azbballban,
    I recall a story coming out just after the quote by the defense attorney that the pictures used in the lineup were not the ones taken without their shirts. Does anyone have the articles?
    You can read the transcript of the identification process. I posted the link in the last thread. If I recall correctly the police took "mug shot" type photos of the team members when they came in for the DNA testing. Those were the photos used in the identification process with the AV.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#82)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 09:36:53 PM EST
    But defense attorneys said the third player accused lived at the house and it is no surprise that trace amounts of his DNA could be found inside his own trashcan. They also said they don't believe the type of fingernails that were found -- the kind that are applied with an adhesive strip -- actually ripped off during an attack. They don't believe the fingernails were ever applied and they say they have pictures to prove it.
    90% guy seems to be a resident of the house. Leaves more room for doubt now. www.nbc17.com

    Hicht, You wrote:
    What is the probability player X is that guy that partially match is 1/46 assuming he is just unlucky.
    Very sharp. Math is great. We don't even have to know how partial the dna result is and we can already make serious statements about the unluckiness of this fellow. Thank you for that quantification.

    But defense attorneys said the third player accused lived at the house and it is no surprise that trace amounts of his DNA could be found inside his own trashcan. They also said they don't believe the type of fingernails that were found -- the kind that are applied with an adhesive strip -- actually ripped off during an attack. They don't believe the fingernails were ever applied and they say they have pictures to prove it.
    Oops. The defense attorneys are trying to make the argument that this particular player's dna wound up under her fingernail by chance. I think that could well be the "own goal" defense clients hate most.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#85)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 10:02:36 PM EST
    The defense attorneys say the nails were never applied. I guess it should be easy to tell if they are used or new.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#86)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 10:07:30 PM EST
    If her other nails have "mixed DNA" as we heard from the first test, and this only has only DNA from the guy who lives there, the defense will eat that up. I wish we knew if the mixed inconclusive DNA was from her real nails rather than a fake one.

    Teresa posted:
    The defense attorneys say the nails were never applied. I guess it should be easy to tell if they are used or new.
    I agree, the adhesive would show signs of having been pressed againt her natural nails, but it seems they aren't even going there:
    They don't believe the fingernails were ever applied and they say they have pictures to prove it.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#88)
    by Teresa on Thu May 11, 2006 at 10:33:24 PM EST
    imho, everything I've read says some of her nails were missing from the beginning. I haven't read anywhere that all of them were. I do think it is significant if that one nail has only one person's DNA and the rest have a mixture. Of course, if it has never been applied, I guess it is a transfer. It will be interesting to see on Monday if the probably indicted guy is a captain since the attorneys say the 90% guy lives there.

    One of the reasons the Cheshire may currently be fairly well trapped into making these "chance" arguments regarding how the dna got where it did is that the police have already interviewed his client for eight hours, locking him into a particular story that perhaps did not include any scratching or lap dancing with the accuser.

    One of the reasons the Cheshire may currently be fairly well trapped into making these "chance" arguments regarding how the dna got where it did is that the police have already interviewed his client for eight hours, locking him into a particular story that perhaps did not include any scratching or lap dancing with the accuser.
    Good point. If all these leaked information is true he is sweating a lot now. I am not an expert but I think these people in the lab should be able to say if a skin tissue attached to the nails by scratching or not.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#91)
    by azbballfan on Thu May 11, 2006 at 11:48:21 PM EST
    Chew2, Yea, there were reports of the defense team reporting on the manner of the photo lineup which I thought said the photos were regular 'mug' shots. Which, I happen to interpret to mean that they weren't torso and head shots without shirts. But then again, now I find myself guilty of slight speculation. Being that I try to hold the posters to a higher standard, I'll say that we need more information to better understand whether or not the players were targeted due to visible scars. (All that said, lacrosse players are pretty rough players and visible scars on their bodies are more likely to be from practice or games. Shoot, basketball is very tame in comparison, but back when I was playing, I can't remember EVER being free of scars from play.)

    Actually I was wondering why defense didnt use consensual sex argument in their defense. That argument could make the case easier than it is now for them. If the 3rd accused is one of the captains like speculated now and gave 8 hour interview, he sure locked the defense with his version of story.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#93)
    by azbballfan on Fri May 12, 2006 at 12:45:22 AM EST
    Hicht, Good point. I've thought about this a bit. Taking into consideration the posistion of the defenders' parents, I doubt they will ever admit to consentual sex. Both fathers attempt to maintain an elite status as equity analysts in their fields of specialty. I do not discount the impact of the accused parents' will to maintain an image on this case. Regardless of what the 'real' public opinion is, I've personally seen too many 'medium profile' cases where everyone agreed to allow a certain perception of the facts to endure by hiding facts.

    azbballfan, This a life and death case for these people's children. I am having hard time to understand they could jeprodize their life for their image. Additionally if they lose the case it will be much bigger image damage for them compared to sleeping with a hooker. I think even though defense is trying to act like they are confident that this case wont go to court, indeedthey know the seriousness of the situation. I still speculate the main reason is third accused's interview with the police.

    I wrote: One of the reasons the Cheshire may currently be fairly well trapped into making these "chance" arguments Actually, I don't mean Cheshire... I believe the captains are represented by either Sutton or Williams.

    The defense has said that no sex took place, and I believe them. What people are suggesting is leaving some doors open that their clients said did not happen. That is unethical.... There was ne sex in that house with this accuser, and the justice system is not going to make sex happen back on that date. The defense played their case right, they have been honest, and personally, I dont see why they should say sex happened when their clients told them it didnt. We have not caught the players in a lie yet, other than them using a fake name to get the strippers.... Lawyers dont keep open doors for their clients. If sex happened then the credibility of the players goes down the drain. So far I have seen no evidence that shows me that sex happened in that house. And if this new BS DNA evidence of the guy who lives in the house is the bombshell that the DA has, he is in big big trouble. Of course the guy who lives there is going to have his DNA on the fingernails thrown in the trash... Now show me his scratch marks? This to me is a wast of money, just arrest the stripper, and drop this case.

    Arrest no ploy, DA says
    It is common practice for police to run the names of people involved in a case because they don't want any surprises when the case goes to court, police spokeswoman Kammie Michael said Thursday.


    Supermike, I was speculating on defense tactics assuming rape occured. If they are innocent those speculations doesnt apply. I realize that there are a lot of people out there who wants to prevent these woman's right to take her accusation in front of court of justice. At least you want just woman's arrest, it looks like there are people ready to hang her because she made accusation to these boys.

    If the second round round of DNA tests implicate Dave Evans (one of the three captains) this explains why Nifong charged him last week (with the old case of "open beer can in the back of his car"). He wanted to taint his criminal record to increase the chances of conviction i.e. he did not want the lawyers talking about how he was a clean-cut guy.

    How is this for a defense for "Mr. 90%": "She was falling down and may have scratched or bumped against me. That is true. The only evidence for rape is her 90% ID of me...but she gave Seligman a 100% ID and he wasn't even there, so her ID isn't worth much. My DNA was nowhere on her body." A mathematically minded jury might wonder about this in considering reasonable doubt on a rape charge.

    Lawyers split on lacrosse reports
    Thomas said that if a lacrosse player had merely picked up the artificial fingernail from the floor and thrown it into a trashcan, some of his DNA would have become attached to the nail.
    Back on April 10th when the DNA results were released to the defense:
    Attorney Joe Cheshire, who represents one of the team's captains, said at a news conference then that the DNA report indicated authorities took samples from the accuser's body, including under her fingernails, and from her possessions, such as her cellphone and clothes.
    "They swabbed about every place they could possibly swab from her in which there could be any DNA," Cheshire said.
    If DNA is as easily transferred as co-captain Bret Thompson's, attorney Bill Thomas has stated, why wasn't any OTHER player's DNA found on her body, her clothing or her belongings? She was rolling on the floor nearly naked, surely some "player DNA" has sloughed off onto that carpet. If she spent time painting her nails in a bathroom the defense claims must be full of the residents' DNA, why wasn't any of it found on her? Did they just leave her belongings where she left them? Her cell phone and make up bag are shown in the 12:30 photo that was taken on the porch. The defense claims she never went back inside. Did the police find her make up bag and phone outside or did someone manage to bring them inside without getting their DNA on them? How about the player that helped her to the car? A careful swabbing "of about every place they could possibly swab from her in which there could be any DNA" did not turn up this gentleman's DNA.

    I have been following this case closely from the time it first broke. This blog has the most detailed, and discerning, comments I have seen. Thanks to all of you for giving me more food for thought. I'd like to pick your collective brains for answers/comments/information on a few things. First, the accuser was only 90% sure about the 3d assailant, and the transcript seems to indicate that the 10% of uncertainty was because, in the picture, he did not have a mustache. But my understanding is that NONE of the players have mustaches, in keeping with team rules. Your thoughts? Second, if there was, as the DA described it, a life and death struggle with the accuser fighting for her life, clawing and scratching at the man choking her, wouldn't one expect they would find more than a partial/incomplete/minute sample under one nail? Third, judging by the relatively small size of the house, as shown in the pictures and video, I would think that the bathroom where the alleged assault took place was an equally small area. How in the world could you even FIT the accuser and the two already indicted players in there, much less add a third player, and have the attack she described occur? To me, the logistics are daunting. Fourth, if the accuser had been forcibly sodomized, I would be amazed if she were not bleeding from that orifice. Does anyone know if the police examined the other dancer/stripper/escort's car for blood on the passenger's seat? Fifth, the accuser's family have stated that when they saw her, she was horribly, and obviously, bruised and swollen, especially her face. Wouldn't the other dancer/stripper/escort, or the Kroger security guard, or the Durham policeman, have noticed this that night/early morning? Thanks for the chance to talk about this. As a Duke alumna and the mother of an 18 year old son, a "privileged," private high school-attending athlete, I hate to think that the Duke lacrosse players committed the horrible, detestable acts the accuser describes. But as a woman and an attorney, I also hate to think that any woman would make a false accusation such as this, or that a district attorney would manipulate or pervert the legal system for his own political purposes.

    If the DNA (and scratch) happened before the fingernails came off, that part of the AV's story looks strong (that they came off, as opposed to they weren't on). I know that the defense (a vague term) said that you could tell that the fingernails were missing in pictures. Anyone remember the first picture where the fingernails were clearly missing? It's not impossible that the fingernails came off in a fight over money or, less likely, she may have accidentally scratched someone who was helping her to ambulate at some point. But if the DNA can be connected with an individual as part of a rape struggle (a big if) then if there is photographic evidence as to when the fingernails came off we can narrow the time frame as to when the rape occurred. If the nails were off by 12:03, then that would indicate the rape occurred before then. Most other things, including actions of the AV, would suggest that it happened after that, but the nails would suggest before then. Just a thought. I need coffee.

    Of course, the AV could have gotten into a fight with someone there over the money, scratched him, and knew damned well who she scratched without having been raped. In other words, Mister 90%'s scratches could have been consistent with participating with a rape or negotiating a fee refund with a stripper for an abbreviated performance.

    SharonInJax, All these things have been discussed here, most without any definitive answers. I don't think anyone came to any conclusion about the mustache thing. The alleged violence of the alleged multiple rape would suggest a lot more noise and more injuries for the alleged assailants. Rapes are accomplished by intimidation, so perhaps the victim was too intimidated to fight back after a point. The problem with the rape being characterized as a life-and-death struggle as opposed to a brief physical intimidation is apparent to many of us. Also, the woman's behavior at the house after any alleged rape is inconsistent with a long, life-and-death struggle which could be partially explained away by any extreme intoxication or drugging. I have problems thinking that if a woman cried rape loud enough for others to hear that no one would come to her aid. But maybe that's just the people I hang with. Regarding the AV's injuries, when the hospital reports come out we'll have a better idea of what injuries she had and how she got each of them. I think most people here have come to the conclusion that the father's comments are not necessarily the best source of accurate information. Certainly, any injuries where the skin isn't broken take time to swell and discolor. The darker a person's pigmentation the longer it takes to discern bruising, and it was at night, so observations are necessarily affected by less light. Also, the AV after a point was not articulate enough to express herself clearly and so was not probably calling attention to any injuries she had suffered.

    IMHO, The ease or difficulty of the DNA getting on the fingernail will be part of the testimony of a case. I imagine the type of cells collected would be important. If, for example, the DNA came from a layer of tissue under the outer layer of skin, you know, the stuff exposed when you skin your knee, for ex, it would be harder to explain away than dandruff that naturally falls off.

    In other words, Mister 90%'s scratches could have been consistent with participating with a rape or negotiating a fee refund with a stripper for an abbreviated performance
    The problem here if news is correct defense lawyers said that this is a guy living in the house. I guess captains are living in the house and each gave a long statement to police. If he didnt mention about a struggle with AV resulting a scratch on him over money then he is in trouble.

    Hicht, He is in trouble no matter, at least as how I define trouble.

    Bob, I should have said BIG trouble.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#110)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 07:59:17 AM EST
    Teresa IMHO etc. Refresh my memory. Weren't there 4 team captains. What were the names of the 3 team members (captains?) who resided at the house. Do we know for sure that it was the same 3 team captains who went in to talk to the police, and did they actually get DNA tested at that time or merely offered to get tested?

    Matt Zash - atty Kerry Sutton Dan Flannery - atty Butch Williams David Evans - atty Bill Cheshire lived at the party house. I'm pretty sure they are the three that gave interviews. Sutton says Matt did. In court Monday, an atty said Evans did, I'm pretty sure Williams said Flannery did. They were photographed (just head? shirtless? I don't know), gave DNA and hair samples. The fourth captain, Bret Thompson is represented by Bill Thomas and lived elsewhere.I don't know if he was interviewed. One of the defense motions filed last week seemed to imply more than the these three players were interviewed, I'll check that out.

    David Evans - atty Bill Cheshire
    That should read: David Evans - atty Joe Cheshire

    SharonInJax, 1) Mustache is a big question mark. They have the photos showing players together in the party. I am hoping this guy is in one of the photos so this question will be cleared without a doubt. 2) In her struggle lack of much skin tissue can be explained by her intoxication or maybe she scratched the guy over his t-shirt, that is why that is the amount of tissue she got. 3) You have a reasonable doubt about the size of the bathroom. But we can't conclude that with just looking outside view of the house. We shall see that in upcoming time. 4) Medical experts examined her shortly after the incident. They exactly know extent of her anal injuries. I don't see how blood trace in the car could give additional information useful for either side. 5) It takes time for the injuries to show up. We don't need to count on father's statements. She was already under medical observation at that point. These injuries will be in their reports in detail.

    chew2 On page 7 of the Duke Administration's Response to Lacrosse Allegations it says:

    Indeed, on March 16, three players resident at 610 N. Buchanan agreed to go to the Durham police station and volunteered to submit to DNA testing and take a lie detector test. They are said to have given, among the three of them, mor than 25 hours of testimony.

    The report doesn't go on to say whether their offers to submit DNA or take a lie detector test were granted.

    SharonInJax,, The statement that none of the players have or had mustaches that night comes from the defense team. Hopefully they have time stamped photos of the 90% player. The players were at school during spring break for lacrosse practice. Supposedly, the players are not allowed to have mustaches. Even with party photos, it could come down to "what's a mustache?" The party was on a Monday night - March 13. They had a match in San Diego, CA, Saturday March 11th. I would assume the player would not show up game day with obvious upper lip hair growth and if he didn't shave his upper lip by the party, would he have what someone might describe as a mustache? Some guys would have enough growth in two days. If he hadn't shaved on game day it could be three days growth. The accuser's description of the type of mustache will be important.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#116)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 08:46:17 AM EST
    IMHO,, Thanks. Found this in a WRAL story:
    Nifong said Wednesday that the three men who rented the house where the alleged rape happened -- Matthew Zash, Dan Flannery and David Evands -- did speak to police at great length after the party, but that since then most have gotten lawyers and are no longer talking.
    The AV stated in the transcript that Finnerty was the second one to sexually assault her and was not the one who strangled her. Ergo it was the third assailant (who she may have identified with 90% certainty) that she says strangled her and first sexually assaulted her. So if the DNA of that third assailant is found under her fingernails as is being reported it supports her story and that she correctly distinguished between the three assailants the one who strangled her. On the other hand, if the DNA is from one of the three at the house and who talked to the police, this suggests either some brazen lieing on their parts, they thought they were innocent, or they thought what they did wasn't that serious. Plus as Teresa points out the possibility of accidental contamination of DNA increases. My gut feeling has always been that some sort of struggle took place otherwise why did she leave her cel phone, makeup back, fingernails, shoe etc. Maybe just over the money, but this was still robbery. (but if so why the vaginal and anal bruising) It sounds like Ryan McFayden knew what happened, otherwise why so angry. Similarly the guys he emailed, they may have been pissed off also. Perhaps he should be subpoenaed and given limited immunity, but I bet he has left the jurisdiction.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#117)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 08:57:41 AM EST
    They compared 46 players DNA with the unknown DNA under her nail. It mismatched 45 players, but partially matched one player.
    Would someone please post a link to a report that says it was a mismatch for all but one player? I only remember reading that it was "consistent with" the DNA of the guy the AV ID'ed with 90% certainty. The report I saw didn't say that it was a mismatch for all the rest of them.

    Paul Ware of Tennessee discovered the potency of mitochondrial DNA testing at his trial in August, 1996. Ware was convicted of rape and murder in part because of a single hair found in the victim's throat. Although none of the victim's blood was found on Ware and no fluids matching Ware were found on the victim, a mitochondrial DNA (MDNA) test established that a single strand of hair found in the victim's throat was Ware's. Ware's trial marked the first time that MDNA testing was introduced as evidence. Predictably, the use of MDNA evidence in criminal proceedings is expected to skyrocket. MDNA testing is superior to conventional testing due to its ability to differentiate between hair and bone samples, as opposed to conventional testing which can be used only with blood or semen samples. The DNA testing presently used in criminal trials analyzes genetic material from the nucleus of the cell; these genes are an amalgam of traits inherited from both parents. Mitochondrial DNA testing compares genetic material in the mitochondria, the crucial energy-producing structures in cells, which are inherited from the female parent. The mitochondrial DNA test is conducted by comparing the samples at 600 sites on the DNA strand where differences often occur. Usually, about 6 sites will differ between any two people. Some experts condemn MDNA testing as unreliable and untested, but the jurors in the Ware case found MDNA testing convincing enough.
    So they convicted this guy with a mDNA test just based on a hair. I think this is a good example you can rape and kill someone without leaving a DNA trace. I hope I am not referencing this article the second time.

    wumhenry posted:
    Would someone please post a link to a report that says it was a mismatch for all but one player? I only remember reading that it was "consistent with" the DNA of the guy the AV ID'ed with 90% certainty. The report I saw didn't say that it was a mismatch for all the rest of them.
    First DNA link possible in lacrosse case
    At the same time, scientists ruled out a possible match with any of the other 45 students, according to the sources.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#121)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 09:13:16 AM EST
    Can you rape someone anally and vaginally, as the AV alleged that Finnerty did to her, without leaving a telltale trace of *anything* --lubricant, epithelial cells, seminal fluid, latex?

    chew, you said, "Maybe just over the money, but this was still robbery." If she really only danced for a few minutes and they took their (hour's worth) payment back, would you consider that robbery? I would feel comfortable taking back money from someone who came to my home and didn't perform a satisfactory job. For me that would be something boring, e.g. a housepainter, but isn't the principle the same? OTOH the painter wouldn't get paid until the work was finished. I gather it's different with stripping.

    It sounds like Ryan McFayden knew what happened, otherwise why so angry. Similarly the guys he emailed, they may have been pissed off also. Perhaps he should be subpoenaed and given limited immunity, but I bet he has left the jurisdiction.
    He was angry, but about what? My guess: no nudity.
    "tommrow night, after tonights show ive decided to have some strippers over to edens2c [his dorm]. all are welcome.. however there will be no nudity I plan on killing the b- - ches as the[y] walk in and proceeding to cut their skin off while c----ing in my duke issue spandex."


    Paul Ware was convicted on a 100% ID of a hair in the victim's throat. In this case there is DNA which reports say is "consistant with" the victim found under a false fingernail. Big difference here.

    wumhenry,
    Can you rape someone anally and vaginally, as the AV alleged that Finnerty did to her, without leaving a telltale trace of *anything* --lubricant, epithelial cells, seminal fluid, latex?
    I have just posted one example. I am sure there are thousands like that out there. By the way in our case if the leak is correct they found telltale trace, a pubic hair.

    Paul Ware was convicted on a 100% ID of a hair in the victim's throat. In this case there is DNA which reports say is "consistant with" the victim found under a false fingernail. Big difference here.
    I was talking about the pubic hair. We still dont know where it was found, but I am sure not in the trashcan.

    Del,
    chew, you said, "Maybe just over the money, but this was still robbery." If she really only danced for a few minutes and they took their (hour's worth) payment back, would you consider that robbery? I would feel comfortable taking back money from someone who came to my home and didn't perform a satisfactory job. For me that would be something boring, e.g. a housepainter, but isn't the principle the same? OTOH the painter wouldn't get paid until the work was finished. I gather it's different with stripping.
    The accuser is claiming they took the money out of her purse. If you have a dispute over services that you can't settle with the service provider or their employer you file a suit small claims court, you can't just take the money back from them. If I pick up my suit at the cleaners and after paying I complain it is not clean, but the owner disagrees with me, can I just reach into the register and take my money back? As for, do the players deserve their money back, I would answer "get it from Dan/Adam." He hired us, but didn't provide a safe place for us to perform.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#128)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 09:39:37 AM EST
    I have just posted one example.
    Oh? You merely said that in that case the only physical evidence that ID'ed the defendant was a hair found in the victim's throat. Not even clear from what you told us that the perp in that case inserted his penis in the victim's anus and/or vagina, and you said nothing about the presence or absence of anything other than perp-matching DNA (e.g., latex or lubricant).

    The Newsweek article did mention that Bill Thomas said that the first DNA result did come back with sort of inconclusive match with two players living in the house. Some people expect that if the samples sent to the first DNA test and the second DNA test are the SAME, the second DNA test shall be expected to only tell more details than the first one. So if the second DNA result comes back to be one of the players living there, the result is not surprising. If it is the DNA of one of the three people living there, their DNA and skin tissues of course are all over the house and bathroom and are pretty easy to be picked up by the adhesive materials under the fake fingernail. When the source said the 3rd man, does that just mean the 3rd player that may be charged, or the 3rd person she mentioned in her id process i.e. the man (supposedly one of the captains living in the house) that paid her, or the 3rd 90% guy? However, even if it is the 90% guy, there's still the question whether he has mustach or not that night. Last night a question occurred to me. Could anyone come out with an explanation? The question is-- how did the AV get out of the bathroom? If she locked herself in the bathroom, and was very intoxicated, how did she get out of the bathroom? How did she also get one of the player's help to get her into the car? Unless the story line goes like this--both women were coaxed back to the house and both locked themselves in the bathroom. I don't remember whether Bissey said that he saw both women coaxed back to the house or he saw that one of them stayed in the car and one of them went back to retrive the shoe. Kim seemed to have said both verions, too--one is that they went in again and was then separated, and the other is that she was sitting in the car waiting the AV went in to retrieve her shoe. There seems to be three versions of story in the news about this part--one is that both of them were coxed back but was separated, another is both went back and both locked themselves in the bathroom, and the third is only one went back to retrieve her shoe while the other waited outside. For the first and the third versions, it is very hard to explain how the AV got herself out of the locked bathroom when she was very intoxicated and needed the player's help to get into the car. Did the player force into the bathroom to get her out? Or was she still able to open the bathroom but then need the player's help to get into the car? It also does not make sense that Or, if we come back to the second version, both women were coaxed back into the house, perhaps for getting ready for the performance again they locked themselves out in the bathroom. The AV became more and more impaired, Kim decided to give up, got dressed, came out of the bathroom, told the player to help the AV out, and then got into her car waiting. One of the players helped the AV out. Anybody has any idea how the AV got out of the bathroom and what her state of consicousness was then?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#130)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 09:51:11 AM EST
    Del,
    I would feel comfortable taking back money from someone who came to my home and didn't perform a satisfactory job.
    The dancers were paid up front here. At that point it became her money. Taking back the property of another by force or intimidation, with the intent to deprive them of it permanently, is common law robbery and is a class G felony in NC. I'm curious why it wasn't charged. Maybe he didn't want to give the jury the option of a lesser crime that had a lesser punishment to rape? Maybe there is insufficient evidence that those who assaulted her specifically took the money, or that any team member took the money? It just disappeared.

    inmyhumbleopinion wrote: No one that knows him has questioned his ethics. For having worked in the DAs office for 27 years, he doesn't seem to have made many enemies. Well, oftentimes power and publicity corrupt one's character. You probably never know a person's full character and weaknesses until they are in power. I think many people will agree with me that Nifong has double standards here treating his own witness or the defense's witness. Nifong said that they found out the cabbie's record through a regular check of all witness's background (today's News and Observer article). Did he check the AV's, too? If he had, he would have found out the AV's previous rape report at Creedmore earlier. Obviously Nifong did not check his witness as comprehensively as he did with the defense's witness. Don't tell me that he is fair-minded and ethical in handling this case. He hasn't handled any criminal cases even after he was promoted to his current office. From the very beginning he is clearly politically motivated to insist on taking this case himself, or else he could let anyone in his office do it as he always did since holding his office prior to this case. It seems to me that what everyone that knows him agree that he likes to win. But who wouldn't in this business?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#132)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 10:06:23 AM EST
    wumhenry,
    Can you rape someone anally and vaginally, as the AV alleged that Finnerty did to her, without leaving a telltale trace of *anything* --lubricant, epithelial cells, seminal fluid, latex?
    What's your proof or evidence that they can test for latex, lubricant etc. What's your evidence that latex or lubricant or epithelial cells would be left behind? Or are you just guessing? Further, is it likely Duke emergency would have collected any of this evidence? I don't watch CSI, so what is technically possible and what's your source? I've heard a lot of BS on TV about how they can detect latex from condoms. I'm guessing those guys are idiots.

    wunhenry posted:
    Paul Ware was convicted on a 100% ID of a hair in the victim's throat. In this case there is DNA which reports say is "consistant with" the victim found under a false fingernail. Big difference here.
    There is a big difference here. You are comparing a brand new magnifying glass to a scratched or smudged high powered microscope. It all depends on how damaged/dirty the microscope lense is. There may be a big difference and the numbers may favor the partial match in this case over the 100% mDNA match in the Paul Ware case. There is a big difference in 100% mitochondrial DNA match and a 100% nuclear DNA match, so much so that a partial DNA match can trump a 100% mDNA match when they march out the matching probability numbers. The DNA expert talking heads have said, depending on how many loci (1-13) match in this sample, the matching probability numbers could be in the millions or billions as opposed to the 13 marker match which often comes out to trillions. A 100% mDNA match comes out way lower than that - matching probabilities of 1 in 5,000 are on the high end. That is why it's use in absence of other evidence is controversial. The DNA experts seemed impressed by the fact that there were enough markers to exclude the other 45 players. I think Nifong will have some impressive numbers to show the jury - if this gets that far.

    Chew2 Wrote: My gut feeling has always been that some sort of struggle took place otherwise why did she leave her cel phone, makeup back, fingernails, shoe etc. Maybe just over the money, but this was still robbery. (but if so why the vaginal and anal bruising) If she left her cell phone, make up bag, fingernails, shoes, etc. then there is no "intent to permently deprive", the required mens rea/intent for robbery, hence no robbery. Even if you could somehow get past this barrier, you would still have petty larcency because of the value of the goods. Though, I guess if it were "aggravated', then they could bump it up to robbery. It sounds like Ryan McFayden knew what happened, otherwise why so angry. Similarly the guys he emailed, they may have been pissed off also. Perhaps he should be subpoenaed and given limited immunity, but I bet he has left the jurisdiction. Angry....everyone go watch "American Psycho" so you get RM's email reference....he is clearly disappointed because they had a 4 minute dance for $800, got told that their manhood was lacking by a mouthy stripper ("they ripped themselves off"...not exactly the best quantum merit statement)and had to deal with a drunk second stripper. As for the drunken AV, no one has focused on the fact that the AV drank 1/2 her drink and all of Kim's before they started dancing...so that's 1 1/2 drinks in a matter of minutes. My experience with mixed drinks in college (and after actually) was that they were always pretty damn strong...and I'm sure the players, who drank hard, made them strong, probably in the standard red/blue 12 oz party cups. Most likely that would mean about 4-5 ozs of booze per drink. So she potentially drank 6 to 9 ounces of booze in a short time. This has a significant effect on anyone and even more so on a woman (i.e., size/weight). It is very reasonable and very likely that if this were the case, she would go from normal to glassy eyed-wasted within 10-15 minutes. I have seen it happen with friends and I have had it happen (recently 4 back to back tequila shots on my B-day put me over the top in about 15 minutes and I'm 6'1", 195 lbs). A very reasonable explanation and more reasonable than being dosed. RM lives in NJ...he probably left the jurisidiction when he was suspended, if he didn't and stayed I'm sure he left along with 99% percent of the student body when classes ended two weeks ago (actually he probably went to Myrtle for a week then went home). Leaving the jurisdaiction would be normal.

    I often mused at Kim's comment about the players having no real manhood. I bet Kim would not have said that if she knew or believed that there was a rape.

    Not sure this got through before...my first comment. But I'm a local attorney, and have wondered what the second dancer was doing while the accuser was in the bathroom. "Searching for her" seemed implausible, since the house is quite small, and 30 minutes is a long time to search. Reliable source involved in the case says she was "spending time" with one of the players. If true, this is another possible credibility issue for the second dancer, and it almost certainly will come in as we're not talking an unrelated case or time. This case gets nastier and more difficult everyday, for everyone involved. and for the community.

    IMHO wrote:
    The accuser is claiming they took the money out of her purse.
    I have never read or heard of this statement. Is it in her interview? Reference please.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#138)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 10:21:52 AM EST
    Kali,
    If she left her cell phone, make up bag, fingernails, shoes, etc. then there is no "intent to permently deprive", the required mens rea/intent for robbery, hence no robbery. Even if you could somehow get past this barrier, you would still have petty larcency because of the value of the goods. Though, I guess if it were "aggravated', then they could bump it up to robbery.
    I was talking about taking the $400 by force or intimidation, not the cel phone. (Although it's certainly possible they took the other stuff too.) That's common law robbery in NC from my brief reading of the Criminal Code. There's no distinction about the amount taken so long as force is used. I'm saying the fact that the cel phone etc. were left behind is to me a sign that some sort of struggle and hasty exit took place. It's the defense advocates like TL who have floated the "struggle or dispute over money" theory.

    hicht, my thought was that blood trace in the car would indicate the timing of any anal intercourse, i.e., that it happened at the house that night rather than at an earlier time which might (most likely would, from my experience) still leave trauma to the area but would not still be actively bleeding. As you note, the medical report from the hospital should clarify this. I still think, though, that at least 2 hours after the alleged assault, bruising and swelling would have been visible to someone before she was seen at the hospital. The other dancer, the Kroger guard, and the Durham cop are, (I know this is terribly politically incorrect to say) or at least sound like African Americans and I would think would be able to see bruising even on dark skin, better than a caucasian person, after that much time had elapsed. Or, perhaps, I am placing too much credence in Mr. Nifong's and the search warrant affidavit's description of the extent of the "beating" as opposed to the rape itself. By the way, it bothers me that the search warrant affidavit misstates facts that the Durham police should have known by then: the AV did NOT report a rape, much less the details thereof, in the 911 call from the Kroger, as stated in the affidavit. According to the Durham City Manager, she did not give details until a day or so later. I suppose it is a small matter, but as I said, it bothers me.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#140)
    by Lora on Fri May 12, 2006 at 10:26:17 AM EST
    As far as DNA goes: In the original DNA tests, if only blood or semen would have returned conclusive results, then, as we've discussed here, fluid swabs from the AV might not have contained any significant amounts from any alleged perps. The question is, would any trace amounts have been recovered, and if so, could they have been analyzed for DNA and would the results have been "conclusive" rather than "inconclusive" (which the defense said meant that NO DNA that had anything to do with sexual contact was recovered from the AV). Clearly huge amounts of DNA from the AV would have been collected in those swabs. I'm thinking that since a mix was recovered, the huge quantities from the AV may have easily overwhelmed any trace amounts from anybody else, and rendered the results "inconclusive." This does not mean that none was recovered, it could simply mean that the pattern from any foreign DNA was obliterated by the extremely strong pattern from the AV's DNA. If you have a separate sample, like skin tissue for example, that would hopefully be from one person, you have a better shot at a clean test. I don't know or remember any results put out by anyone except the defense that stated that nothing at all (latex, lubricant, spermicide, etc) was found in those swabs. IMO, they already spun "inconclusive" around to mean "none," so I don't know if I trust their take on the results. IF a skin sample that could have reasonably gotten under the AV's fingernail by forceful scratching (and not reasonably by other means) has DNA that matches Mr. 90%, then although it doesn't prove a rape happened, it would lend more credibility to her story. And it would remove credibility from those who said "nothing happened."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#141)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 10:26:52 AM EST
    mmyy,
    I often mused at Kim's comment about the players having no real manhood. I bet Kim would not have said that if she knew or believed that there was a rape.
    bwahahahaahhhhaaaaa!!!!! Wow you're really reaching. Such a mean thing for her to say "limp white d*ck". Hey I bet you those guys made those same sort of comments to each other when they were in a good mood. And of course when Kim made those statements she had no idea what had happened to the AV, but she was pissed at the lacrosse team.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#142)
    by azbballfan on Fri May 12, 2006 at 10:36:30 AM EST
    mmyy,
    I often mused at Kim's comment about the players having no real manhood. I bet Kim would not have said that if she knew or believed that there was a rape.
    Yea, if the guys raped the AV, then Kim would have been way too impressed by their 'manhood' to have said this. Are you implying that she would have been too intimidated to say this, or too impressed (oh baby, I want some of that!). WTF?????

    Lora, the whole "skin sample DNA under the fake fingernail" issue has a strong possibility of being completely irrelevant, should the defense prove it's apparent claim that the fingernail had never been attached to her finger.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#144)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 10:39:44 AM EST
    local attorney
    Reliable source involved in the case says she was "spending time" with one of the players. If true, this is another possible credibility issue for the second dancer, and it almost certainly will come in as we're not talking an unrelated case or time.
    Why would this affect her credibility? It would explain where she was when the rape occurred and why she wasn't a witness to it. My question is what team members were around during the alleged rape, and will any of them testify at trial, especially the guy who was according to your rumor getting a blow job from her at the time. lol, News reports have her saying she was outside in the car when the AV returned to the house alone. That appears to be her current story as to her whereabouts at the time of the alleged rape.

    inmyhumbleopinion posted:
    No one that knows him has questioned his ethics. For having worked in the DAs office for 27 years, he doesn't seem to have made many enemies.
    mmyy replied:
    Well, oftentimes power and publicity corrupt one's character. You probably never know a person's full character and weaknesses until they are in power.
    Oh, I have a pretty good idea of the character of a few commenters here.... I happen to personally know the retiring DA of my county and an attorney running for his vacancy. I've seen them both under extreme pressure - like Nifong they both umpire Little League baseball. Talk about making enemies...I'm surprised Nifong got any votes. mmyy posted:
    I think many people will agree with me that Nifong has double standards here treating his own witness or the defense's witness. Nifong said that they found out the cabbie's record through a regular check of all witness's background (today's News and Observer article). Did he check the AV's, too? If he had, he would have found out the AV's previous rape report at Creedmore earlier. Obviously Nifong did not check his witness as comprehensively as he did with the defense's witness.
    The reporting of a crime does not show up on a "wants and warrants" check. It's not a crime to report a rape even if some people think not following through "suggests" the report was false.
    Don't tell me that he is fair-minded and ethical in handling this case. He hasn't handled any criminal cases even after he was promoted to his current office. From the very beginning he is clearly politically motivated to insist on taking this case himself, or else he could let anyone in his office do it as he always did since holding his office prior to this case.
    His assistance was requested due to the unusual circumstance of obtaining the court ordered cooperation of 43 potential witnesses to a reported violent sexual assault. mmyy posted:
    It seems to me that what everyone that knows him agree that he likes to win. But who wouldn't in this business?
    The guy I know running for DA, he's been a Little League coach for ten years. I know how much he likes to win, but that's not why I'm voting for him. I'm voting for him because I've seen what he'll do to win and more importantly, what he won't do. Seems to me Nifong's critics are hard pressed to find any precedent for unethical behavior.

    mmyy posted:
    I often mused at Kim's comment about the players having no real manhood. I bet Kim would not have said that if she knew or believed that there was a rape.
    She didn't then and doesn't now know there was a rape. If she had known, I would think her observation would be even more appropriate. Hey mmyy, in case you're confused: real men don't rape.

    SharonInJax, I remember many occasions when I am hit by something; I get a colored bruise on my skin. After that initial bruise, I am honestly saying it takes a long time for swelling, sometimes even a day. I am thinking that on a dark complexion person that initial bruise will be hard to see. Additionally this police who reported to the scene are supposed to determine if the person needs urgent medical attention. His job isn't to report a total medical status of the person. Note that he also didn't mention about the bruises and cuts on her legs and knees, which is claimed to be seen in the party photos clearly. As far as reporting the rape, as far as I remember she reported rape to the officer who responded to 911 call.

    IMHO Wrote:
    His assistance was requested due to the unusual circumstance of obtaining the court ordered cooperation of 43 potential witnesses to a reported violent sexual assault.
    Source?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#149)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 11:08:09 AM EST
    The dancers were paid up front here. At that point it became her money. Taking back the property of another by force or intimidation, with the intent to deprive them of it permanently, is common law robbery and is a class G felony in NC.
    If a DA asked me to indict someone for robbery merely for taking back part of a $400 advance payment for 2 hours of dancing from a stripper who quit without good cause 3 minutes after taking the money, I'd spit in his eye.

    Kalidoggie, Here you go: The second search warrant
    ...consistent with the victim claiming $400.00 cash in all twenty dollar bills was taken from her purse immediately after the rape.
    Kinda a reverse tip?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#151)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 11:17:52 AM EST
    Maybe just over the money, but this was still robbery. (but if so why the vaginal and anal bruising)
    Has there been any report that the examiner was able to rule out the possiblity that the bruises resulted from something that happened before the AV showed up at 610 Buchanan Street?

    IMHO:
    ...consistent with the victim claiming $400.00 cash in all twenty dollar bills was taken from her purse immediately after the rape. Kinda a reverse tip?
    Thanks. I guess the AV didn't get the $100 mentioned in Bissey's statement either.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#153)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 11:22:36 AM EST
    Posted by inmyhumbleopinion
    May 12, 2006 11:06 AM wunhenry posted: Paul Ware was convicted on a 100% ID of a hair in the victim's throat. In this case there is DNA which reports say is "consistant with" the victim found under a false fingernail. Big difference here.
    I didn't post that comment.

    Kalidoggie,
    Source?
    Kali, Are you forgetting I'm married to him? Was his assistance requested? OK. I don't know that for a fact. It is an unusal request and would much more likely be granted by a judge if the DA himself was seeking the order. I assumed the attorney in charge asked for his assistance.

    IMHO:
    Kali, Are you forgetting I'm married to him?
    I told you he is cheating on you.
    Was his assistance requested? OK. I don't know that for a fact. It is an unusal request and would much more likely be granted by a judge if the DA himself was seeking the order. I assumed the attorney in charge asked for his assistance.
    I assumed he was being a politcal opportunist to shore up the black vote by showing he was equally committed to prosecuting white Duke students and deflecting his weakness on the rising gang violence problems of Durham. The essence of speculation.

    Posted by rogan1313
    Paul Ware was convicted on a 100% ID of a hair in the victim's throat. In this case there is DNA which reports say is "consistant with" the victim found under a false fingernail. Big difference here.
    wumhenry posted:
    I didn't post that comment.
    OOPS! I noticed that and forgot to correct it. Sorry, wumhenry. rogan1313 posted that.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#157)
    by Lora on Fri May 12, 2006 at 11:42:26 AM EST
    suo, Not being a forensic scientist, I don't know. It may come down to whether the prosecution can prove that force was required to get that tissue sample under that nail, or whether the defense can prove that the nail was never on her finger. However, on the surface anyway, the nail evidence does appear to support her story, and does not appear to support the story of the players.

    to chew2\ If I were cross examinining Kim re her activities, I would point out how supposedly angry she was at racist, frightening behavior, but yet she comes back in for a "transaction," as in "isnt it correct, Ms Roberts, that all is forgiven for you given the right price?". This fits right in with what defense will say anyway, that she lies at will or otherwise does what she has to to protect her interests, ie makes up stories in 911 calls, to PR firms for publicity, for reduction in her bond, etc etc. It's general believability and likability that the jury will be looking at, for her and every single witness. Going from an exotic dancer to a prostitute affects that, like it or not.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#159)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 11:47:08 AM EST
    IMHO & Kali
    His assistance was requested due to the unusual circumstance of obtaining the court ordered cooperation of 43 potential witnesses to a reported violent sexual assault.
    I think you are accurate here. The first search warrant appears to have been obtained by the police w/o Nifong's assistance. After the team stonewalled the police, it appears Nifong got involved to obtain the court order for the DNA testing. I'm guessing that was something the police needed legal assistance to obtain.

    chew2, if Roberts is saying she was in her car when the rape occurred, that would seem to put the rape after 12:30. There wouldn't have been enough time then. It would also conflict with the AV's story that the rape happened when the two of them returned. I wonder if this is a change in her story, per what the defense attorneys have claimed. The two of them could have reentered, been separated and then Roberts went back to the car for a half hour. But why would Roberts wait for the AV? Why wouldn't she have suspected the AV had been raped later, when the AV was helped into the car around 12:40? +++ As far as the rumor of prostitution, I have said several times that there seems to be a truce between the DA and the defense about what would be a perfectly rational finale for a show like this. I can easily see the defense strategy being that Nifong has to prove that sex took place and if he does then he has to prove that it wasn't prostitution. If that's their strategy, then the rumor of prostitution is the first shot across the bow. "Nothing happened" has been interpreted as no sex happened, but in the process of backpedaling I can easily see prostitution as a fallback position. Then "nothing happened" can mean that no rape happened. ++ How would it affect Roberts' credibility? First, if she was saying that she was in her car but was actually giving blowjobs, that would show that she was lying about what she was doing and where she was that night. That would effectively destroy her credibility and suggest another reason for animus against the attendees. Prostitutes don't generally see their johns with much respect, and the racist back-and-forth on top of that wouldn't help her appear as a neutral party in the case. Prostitution is a crime. She would be committing a crime at the time that her partner was claiming she was being raped. It's one thing to have a criminal record, it's another thing to be committing a crime, a sexual crime at that, while her partner claims to have had a sexual crime committed on her. If Roberts were committing acts of prostitution, how do we know that whatever happened to the AV were not acts of prostitution? How do we know that any arguments that may have occurred were not arguments over the fee? The AV's behavior between the time she left the Buchanan house and her report of rape to the cop did not indicate a rape occurred to any of the witnesses, including Roberts. If the AV were doing three one-on-one's a week, that would suggest that she was in the game. If she's in the game, the jury will have to believe that she's a prostitute but wasn't that night at that time. Prostitutes get raped, too, undoubtedly more than an average woman, but those rapes are harder to prove. +++ Why would a guy at the party admit he got a blowjob from Roberts? First off, it's the perfect alibi. "I wasn't screwing the AV, the other stripper was sucking me off." Secondly, no matter what Roberts may have shouted back at the men there, there's no dishonor in getting a blowjob.

    Kalidoggie posted:
    I have had it happen (recently 4 back to back tequila shots on my B-day put me over the top in about 15 minutes and I'm 6'1", 195 lbs).
    Ah, Kali, doggie, you've put on a few. I can see from an old roster you were 185 lbs. in college. Nice thing about the internet, old friends can't see how much you've let yourself go.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#162)
    by weezie on Fri May 12, 2006 at 11:57:07 AM EST
    If the amount of skin tissue under the nail is next to negligible, very small, minute, wouldn't that contradict her claiming to have clawed and gouged her attackers? Shouldn't she have come up with a large amount of material? And can't a leg or arm hair, especially from a male, be mistaken for a pubic hair? Has anything been said about the hair resulting from the SANE combing or just found on her nail? And I sure hope the fourth guy isn't captain Dave; my daughter is a Duke junior who literally blanched when she saw his picture on tv last week after the reinstatement of the open container violation. She was deeply saddened, shouting out that he was truly, "such a nice guy, everybody loves him" and I know this isn't really appropriate on this site but the psychic load on all Duke kids has been immense.

    Orinoco, sounds like IMHO is stalking Kali to me. Maybe he's just lonely.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#164)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 12:05:24 PM EST
    Bob, I had to laugh.
    Prostitutes don't generally see their johns with much respect,
    And strippers do? And of course the customers of strippers and prostitutes are notorious for their great respect and affection. These are relatively minor credibility issues to me. Both team members and Kim have told lies and made mistaken statements for understandable reasons, to avoid embarrasment or entanglement with the law. The team lied about their names and lied or mistated whether Seligmann was present. They then fessed up to the police at least as to lieing about their names. Kim lied about how she met the AV so she wouldn't become involved, then I assume fessed up to the police when she made her statement. They arrested her anyway. But the big elephant in the house is the team members motivation to lie for each other, or to shade the truth, because of their team solidarity. Next to that, Kim's motivation to lie about the what she knows about the alleged rape is pretty minor. I've said I don't think any sexual services were provided that night, because Kim was pissed off at the players and vice versa. If she had earned additional money by providing sexual services, they wouldn't have split so soon or on such bad terms.

    weezie, If they didn't do it, it's pretty terrible for all concerned. Likewise, if they did. Historically, nice guys have often done bad things when they let their dicks do their thinking for them.

    Orinoco,
    Is that a personal threat?
    Report me to my husband, Orinoco.

    chew2, You don't believe any sex happened because Roberts was angry? My guess is that there's a lot of submerged hostility wherever blowjobs are sold. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It's a question of negotiating the price. It would also explain the comment that Bissey overheard between two men outside the house, "It's only a hundred dollars." What did she do for the half-hour her partner was being raped? Wait outside in the car? Continue to dance, oblivious to the screaming and beating taking place in the bathroom? Sit down and watch TV with the guys? Regarding your imaginary elephant, if no one's talking everyone's not lying. Amazing how you think that forty or so men are all willing to lie to cover up a felony. I think that sometimes your rooting interests betray your logic. I have no confidence of anything that happened in the house that night.

    Bob in Pacifica posted:
    Why would a guy at the party admit he got a blowjob from Roberts? First off, it's the perfect alibi. "I wasn't screwing the AV, the other stripper was sucking me off." Secondly, no matter what Roberts may have shouted back at the men there, there's no dishonor in getting a blowjob.
    Unless it's the source of the limp d*ck taunt.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#169)
    by ltgesq on Fri May 12, 2006 at 12:22:52 PM EST
    Theodore D. Kessis is an outstanding pprofessional who i would trust completely.

    Nifong said that they found out the cabbie's record through a regular check of all witness's background (today's News and Observer article). Did he check the AV's, too? If he had, he would have found out the AV's previous rape report at Creedmore earlier. Obviously Nifong did not check his witness as comprehensively as he did with the defense's witness.
    Actually, as I commented here, I think he did check the AV's background fairly early in the game, though I can't say how early.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#171)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 12:27:59 PM EST
    localone
    I would point out how supposedly angry she was at racist, frightening behavior, but yet she comes back in for a "transaction,"
    This might be important if the defense is trying hard to remove the racial taint against the defendants. But the key points Kim can address to my mind are: - the time line - whether they were both paid up front - whether they were ever in the bathroom alone or together - whether the AV showed up intoxicated - whether the AV was missing any fingernails - whether the AV was wimpering in the car
    It's general believability and likability that the jury will be looking at, for her and every single witness. Going from an exotic dancer to a prostitute affects that, like it or not.
    Fair point. Even if there's no sex shown here, I'm sure the defense will imply that escorts and strippers are the same as prostitutes, and leave the rest to the jury's imagination. Depending on the makeup of the jury, I don't think that will fatally hurt Kim's testimony. As I said I don't think any sex went down, but if your rumoured source is in a position to know please give us a hint.

    chew2 Source is very, very involved.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#173)
    by azbballfan on Fri May 12, 2006 at 12:41:05 PM EST
    If a DA asked me to indict someone for robbery merely for taking back part of a $400 advance payment for 2 hours of dancing from a stripper who quit without good cause 3 minutes after taking the money, I'd spit in his eye.
    Posterchild for "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."
    Why would a guy at the party admit he got a blowjob from Roberts? First off, it's the perfect alibi. "I wasn't screwing the AV, the other stripper was sucking me off." Secondly, no matter what Roberts may have shouted back at the men there, there's no dishonor in getting a blowjob.
    Bob, I agree with you if the customers in question are independant men. But these boys are very dependant upon their parents for money and support. They are as afraid of the long term consequences to their inheritences as the short term consequences of jail time. This comment comes from watching wealthy kids in similar circumstances. By always stepping in with some money or influence to get a kid where they need to be (or out of trouble), the parents ensure that the kids will always be sucking at the teet and do whatever is asked of them. When you play in the circles of power and influence, its all about maintaining the facade of propriety.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#174)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 12:46:14 PM EST
    localone,
    Source is very, very involved.
    Stop tantalizing us! Some of the people commenting here have claimed that some defense attorneys have stated that "no sex" of any kind occurred. I always questioned that. So you're saying those defense atty's were lieing or mistaken. Or making artful denials like, Kerry Sutton the attorney for Matt Zash. Sutton stated that her client had no knowledge that sex or an assault occurred. But her client Zash was reputed to be in his room for most of the night so he wouldn't know.

    SUO wrote:
    Lora, the whole "skin sample DNA under the fake fingernail" issue has a strong possibility of being completely irrelevant, should the defense prove it's apparent claim that the fingernail had never been attached to her finger.
    Their claim is that this is something their photos will prove. These are the same people who think that the photos can prove that she was intoxicated before she came to the party. So we know to a moral certainty that they are prone to using the word "proof" with reckless abandon. Now we're just haggling over the price.

    There seem to have been no new leaks out today as to just how "partial" this "partial" match is. It's odd that, in the leaks, the sources didn't provide any sense of this. I'm also wondering about earlier reports that there were multiple DNA samples under the accuser's nails. If so, it would suggest that the accuser had DNA on her that belonged neither to her nor to team members, if this leak if correct and there's no DNA linking the other 45 players.

    Orinoco, On another tattlefest? Your last one didn't work out too well for you - you almost got yourself banned. Relax, it is a joke, between me and Kalidoggie. No need for you to get twisted over my post to him. I'm sure if Kalidoggie thinks anyone is threatening him he can take care of himself. Try to curb your altruism.

    Hicht, your 1/705 calculation above is misleading. You are ignoring the fact that there were 46 players at risk. So while there is a 1/705 chance that a particular player would be picked out twice, the chance that one of the 46 players would be picked out twice is 46 times as large or 1/15. This is the appropriate probability to use in assessing the likelihood of this happening by chance.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#179)
    by azbballfan on Fri May 12, 2006 at 01:13:50 PM EST
    James, Sorry, but the chance of one of the players being picked by the accuser is 1/46. The chance that that player would also have his skin under her fingernail is less. You may want to re-read your basic statistics books, becuase the math you used is a bit sketchy at best. That being said, the chance of the AV picking out someone she scratched is pretty high. All the other statistics are fun to run, but meaningless.

    James and azbballfan,
    Hicht, your 1/705 calculation above is misleading. You are ignoring the fact that there were 46 players at risk. So while there is a 1/705 chance that a particular player would be picked out twice, the chance that one of the 46 players would be picked out twice is 46 times as large or 1/15. This is the appropriate probability to use in assessing the likelihood of this happening by chance.
    I think James is right. But note that this DNA successfully differed him from the population of 46 at worst. Since there is partial match we can expect that this lab experts will give up a smaller probability than 1/46. Than we should apply this to the population of 46 and add the probability of AV picking him up by chance. As you said, right now in worst secanario of DNA matching, the probablity that she has picked him by luck is 1/15 which is 6.6%. 93.4% it is his DNA or 6.6% he is just picked by chance without a match. The statistic report that would come out of the lab will going to change the probability in the favor of 93.4%.

    If she scratched one of twenty or so guys lemon-zest style (I really love that image, imho :)), she would also be more likely to remember his face for the photo id, no matter what the circumstances of the scratch.

    Del,
    If she scratched one of twenty or so guys lemon-zest style (I really love that image, imho :)), she would also be more likely to remember his face for the photo id, no matter what the circumstances of the scratch.
    This came up yesterday night too. This calculation is to show even a partial match coupled with her identification is going to pinpoint one player with certainty close to a perfect match. If you are already saying that she scratched him for whatever reason and that is his DNA under her nail then that is the result I was trying to get at.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#183)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 02:06:05 PM EST
    James, Hicht, and Azbball Just curious what are is your statistical training/background? Just curious.

    'The Abrams Report' for May 11
    ABRAMS: Well look, I can tell you that the defense's theory--the defense claims that the woman and her friend were in the bathroom and that presumably she was putting on fingernail polish. They don't say anyone saw this, but based on the fact that there were these fingernails they say in the garbage in the bathroom that that's how it happened, was that she may have been putting them on, et cetera, or in the bathroom. Could that be--
    I mean, again could that be an explanation for transfer...
    KOBILINSKY: Well Dan...
    ABRAMS: ... or is that a long shot?
    KOBILINSKY: ... no doubt--it's a long shot, but no doubt the defense attorney can argue secondary transfer, that that DNA got onto the fingernails and that's what you are measuring. It's a long shot, though. You'd have to convince a jury of the probability of that happening.
    ABRAMS: Moses Schanfield, what do you make of that? Do you agree?
    SCHANFIELD: Well, I think the question is if, in fact, there is tissue and the DNA was extracted from tissue, it's much less likely. When we're talking about low copy number from fingerprints and casual transfers, you are talking about very small amounts of DNA.
    Would it have wound up where it did on the fingernails? Well, without knowing where it came from on the fingernails, that's difficult to answer. So, certainly the defense can argue that it's casual transfer or passive transfer. I think the physical evidence and the location will tell us a lot more about it.
    I wonder if this is just an assumption Abrams is making or if he knows the nails were found in the bathroom trash can as opposed to a kitchen trash can or an outside trash can?

    James,
    Hicht, your 1/705 calculation above is misleading. You are ignoring the fact that there were 46 players at risk. So while there is a 1/705 chance that a particular player would be picked out twice, the chance that one of the 46 players would be picked out twice is 46 times as large or 1/15. This is the appropriate probability to use in assessing the likelihood of this happening by chance.
    Hicht was just saying how unlucky the individual player was. A guy can't be said to be unlucky when some other sap loses twice. The 3/46 figure is misleading. First off, the accuser seems to have id'd four people. But two of these people weren't id'd as scratchers. Rather, they were excluded as scratchers. So 1/15 should go back up to 1/30, no?

    chew2 Just curious what are is your statistical training/background? Just curious. I am just a boring engineer.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#187)
    by azbballfan on Fri May 12, 2006 at 02:18:26 PM EST
    A dual Economics/Mathematics degree. (I've always found it really funny that my diploma was issued by the college of Letters and Arts, not the college of Science).

    The 3/46 figure is misleading. First off, the accuser seems to have id'd four people. But two of these people weren't id'd as scratchers. Rather, they were excluded as scratchers. So 1/15 should go back up to 1/30, no?
    I agree. I was about to make the same point. She identified the person she scrachted.

    Hicht, you seemed to be saying that if the fingernail DNA belonged to the same guy that she identified out of the lineup, then the only explanation for his innocence would be that he was extremely "unlucky." It occurred to me that if she did scratch him for whatever reason, it might also make her more likely to id him. Another explanation for the perfect match. While I'm here: chew, what if they didn't take the money back from her "by force or intimidation" but just slipped it back out of her purse while she was in the bathroom w/ the makeup bag? Is that still a felony? I do understand that the money was technically in her possession once they paid her. AZ: those diners that put up the "We reserve the right to refuse anyone" signs don't take the money then refuse to serve the customer.

    IMHO:
    Ah, Kali, doggie, you've put on a few. I can see from an old roster you were 185 lbs. in college. Nice thing about the internet, old friends can't see how much you've let yourself go.
    Nice try! You wish you knew me. Irrespective of that, if gaining 10 lbs after college is letting oneself go then 90% of college graduates let themselves go...but what about the athletes that drop weight after college. If you were an "old friend", you would know that I look exactly like I did in college....something mere mortals like yourself have a hard time understanding. Too bad Duke removed all the rosters from the web site back in March. Keep guessing.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#191)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 02:40:15 PM EST
    azzbballfan,
    A dual Economics/Mathematics degree.
    So what odds on Phoenix winning the series against the Clips? I took your basic graduate level introductory stats series and some econometrics classes. I barely made it through them! Something about your stats discussion doesn't sound right to me. If I figure it out, I'll post. Del
    but just slipped it back out of her purse while she was in the bathroom w/ the makeup bag?
    If there is no force or intimidation, it would be larceny (theft) and probably a misdemeanor. Curious fact. If you steal ginseng in NC its a felony. They must have a powerful lobby.

    Lora, PB, all good points. It just seems that some here are dismissing out of hand the defense's claimed apparent ability to dismiss the "DNA under the fake fingernail" when, in fact, their claim may be entirely accurate. Something doesn't seem quite right to me...if she purposly scratched someone in self-defense as he was violently attacking her, wouldn't you expect her to remember him, better than 90%? iow, he's someone who she had specific interaction with, so she should remember him specifically. No? I guess the bigger question is do we have leaked info that the scratchee is Mr. 90%? I've lost track of what leaked, maybe false maybe true, info we are speculating with...

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#193)
    by chew2 on Fri May 12, 2006 at 02:50:45 PM EST
    IMHO, Re the defense story that the AV and Kim were in the bathroom. Abrams says the defense state:
    They don't say anyone saw this...
    Do you recall if this is correct. Don't the defense lawyers who put out thus claim imply that they've talked to witnesses. Or could this whole story be based on photos of her nails? If they haven't, then we may have some artful but truthful misrperesentation here. Have the lawyers carefully refused to ask their clients certain questions, so they don't knowlingly have to lie on their behalf which would be unethical.

    Del,
    Hicht, you seemed to be saying that if the fingernail DNA belonged to the same guy that she identified out of the lineup, then the only explanation for his innocence would be that he was extremely "unlucky."
    No. Let me try another way. His being extremely unlucky condition is: Even though DNA under the nails doesn't belong to him, DNA test shows consistency with just his among other 46 players and at the same time AV points him in the lineup. That is a small probability. So it is more rational to say that the DNA under her nails really belongs to him. I am not speculating on how it got there or innocent of the player.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#195)
    by Teresa on Fri May 12, 2006 at 02:56:22 PM EST
    suo, according to all the news last night the DNA is consistent with the 90% guy. I just saw on the abc website that the defense was given the results at 5:00 today. I think they'll start leaking results soon. I'm not sure how much I trust any leakers anymore since it took a month to find out that their excluded was really inconclusive. Maybe we'll have a leaking contest from both sides.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#196)
    by azbballfan on Fri May 12, 2006 at 03:02:57 PM EST
    Del, You hire a clown to perform at your kid's party and pay him $400 upfront for two hours. One of the parents laughs and jokes about how funny it would be to stick a broom up the clown's butt. Clown leaves and doesn't perform. Strange, but doesn't sound unreasonable. Why is the dancer situation different? Because the guys were hoping to get more than what they paid for and didn't. The added frustration that the gals didn't submit themselves to all the fantasies of the players for a couple hundred bucks is a slap to the face of their patriarchial rights of oppression. chew2, The chances of the Clippers making it to the Western Finals is directly proportional to the percentage of shots they take below the free throw line. As long as Dunleavy packs the paint and draws the Suns defenders inside, they'll rule the boards and slow the transition by making it difficult for the Suns to get that first pass off a defensive rebound. This Suns team is similar to that Dallas team a few years ago which could always get a lot of regular season wins because their style of play is so different, it's difficult to adjust. But in a seven game series, they have a tough time holding the advantage.

    Hicht: Ohhhhh. I thought it was all snark, like, yeah, poor fellow, all completely random and she picked him, go figure, what are the odds? So yes, I agree with you. Even if it's random trashcan DNA and not from a scratch, the chance of her id'ing the guy it belongs to are still good. Aren't the guys who live in the house the ones who paid her? maybe opened the door for her, fixed her drink, etc. So she'd have a better memory of their faces. And he lives in the house and deposits DNA in that trashcan daily. (if it's a bathroom trashcan) It is remarkable anyway though. Frat boys all look alike to me even when I'm sober, and I'm white.

    AZ, the defense story about the broom remark ("hey, did y'all bring any toys? No? Why not use this?") sounds a lot more plausible to me than a rabid patriarchal oppressive hostile broom threat. It was early in the performance, the guys are trying to enjoy their $400 worth of dance. YMMV

    Kalidoggie posted:
    Too bad Duke removed all the rosters from the web site back in March. Keep guessing.
    Ah, the 195 pound guy, I can stop guessing, now. :) Oh course, you know I was just joking around. I didn't even post that to yank Orinoco's chain - but inexplicably it did. Now he'll have more time to patrol the blogosphere for real stalkers - keeping the net safe for us all.

    Teresa, thanks.

    AZ wrote:
    One of the parents laughs and jokes about how funny it would be to stick a broom up the clown's butt.
    Obviously the parents were clowning around. And to a parallel extent so were the players. They asked if they brought any sex toys (a reasonable question), when they said no, someone said here we can use this broomstick. Obviously it was a comment in bad taste and offensive, but not a threat.

    sarcastic unnamed one posted:
    Something doesn't seem quite right to me...if she purposly scratched someone in self-defense as he was violently attacking her, wouldn't you expect her to remember him, better than 90%?
    As per Nifong's demonstration on TV, the scratched person was the strangler and he was the one behind her (when Finnerty wasn't - ugh)

    Thanks, imho, I didn't see Nifong on tv. It still seems a little odd to me that she really never caught a better look at his face considering the violent nature of the struggle she was involved in, but I do suppose it's possible.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#204)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 03:45:17 PM EST
    But the big elephant in the house is the team members motivation to lie for each other, or to shade the truth, because of their team solidarity. Next to that, Kim's motivation to lie about the what she knows about the alleged rape is pretty minor.
    If I were in their shoes and had reason to know that the AV was raped in the house while I was present, avoiding a conviction for aiding and abetting would easily trump team loyalty.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#205)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 03:52:35 PM EST
    the scratched person was the strangler
    Or maybe a guy who got scratched while taking money back, or who she scratched accidentally, or who she scratched because she was pissed off for a reason that had nothing to do with rape, to mention a few other possibilities.

    If Kim stole the $400, that would be one motivation.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#207)
    by weezie on Fri May 12, 2006 at 03:58:30 PM EST
    Forgive me, here I was all sad and worried when I read the comment about the clown and the broom and I can't stop laughing. Do you think the players might have asked the girls to insert the broom and sweep up the hair and skin flakes on the floor as long as they were at it? Maybe that is what caused Kim and Miss M to blow a gasket.

    Bob In Pacifica wrote: We're not moving up to four assailants, are we? If so, what would that mean? >>That means she can't ID the 4th but has some ID about three. Keep in mind the date-rape drug theory... << Bob In Pacifica wrote: If Roberts were committing acts of prostitution, how do we know that whatever happened to the AV were not acts of prostitution? How do we know that any arguments that may have occurred were not arguments over the fee? >> I knew if any DNA was conclusive then people would speculate the sex was consensual. Or she had sex before she came to the party. No woman is going to agree to have a rigid object shoved in her anus! The hair was linked to a white guy. I didn't think that white guys were in to black women. However there are rumors that there are white guys that like to have black women use strap ons in their anus<< localone wrote: I would point out how supposedly angry she was at racist, frightening behavior, but yet she comes back in for a "transaction," >> We don't know about that date-rape drug theory. That would impact her judgment. << Lora wrote: I wonder if anyone has looked at 90%'s arm? >> Too late, would have already healed by now << Supamike wrote: Of course the guy who lives there is going to have his DNA on the fingernails thrown in the trash... >> Under the nails?? So he just felt like scratching himself with fake nails?? << All this speculation...is related to false info released by the media...there is no official release. Someone had a comment about explaining the vaginal & anal brusing: >> The alleged reports are she was sodomized and raped. If anyone says she had anal sex before she arrived that's insane. I'm not an expert, but with repeated Anal sex--there is anal leakage and in her line of work, do you think she would risk that fluid escaping from her anus when she was dancing? << My comment on Seigelman not having enough time to thrust his tool in her mouth... Let's be honest guys...if you thrust 30 times, isn't that enough for gratification? There are some men in their 50s that would be happy with five times! And how long does that take? One guy is holding her arms over her head; And the other guy is holding her ankles. Reid then kneels over her while holding her jaws. Noone said he stayed around for the whole attack. And we don't know if the attack was 15 or 20 minutes.. She was allegedly impaired during the attack. The defense has to have evidence he wasn't there at all vs. not enough time to THRUST IN HER MOUTH.. And noone knows--unless the informant tells us if he squirted in her mouth. Noone said he had to thrust until he squirted either...

    IMHO said: "Unless it's the source of the limp d*ck taunt." If Roberts spoke from personal knowledge about limp dicks at the house that night, she's gone far to have established that prostitution was happening in the house that night. Not good for the AV.

    While I agree that the broomstick comment may have been totally serious, as someone who's been to a few batchelor parties, etc., with strippers, my bet is that it was one of many, dozens probably, of (rude, dark humor-type) comments who's sole intent was to make the other guys laugh.

    According to the line up transcript version it wasn't as benign as "hey, did y'all bring any toys? No? Why not use this?" WRAL line up transcript p. 12
    victim: He said, um, he was going to stick broomsticks up your asses.
    The search warrant version was something like,"I'm going to shove this up you."(While holding up the broom so they could see it). Those versions suggest he was going to be using the broomstick on them, not handing the broom over so they'd have to pleasure themselves. Inconsiderate Goofus says: Hey, did y'all bring any toys? No? Why not use this? Gallant offers to assist the young ladies: I'm going to stick broomsticks up your asses.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse: DNA on Tissue Consistent With (none / 0) (#212)
    by wumhenry on Fri May 12, 2006 at 04:07:49 PM EST
    Another motive, which might be overriding, would be to avoid antagonizing the local hotheads who've never doubted the AV's story and would likely regard her as a traitor to her race if she gave testimony that helped the defendants.

    IMHO said: "Unless it's the source of the limp d*ck taunt."
    Bob, it was a joke.

    I wonder why the AV didn't scratch Seligmann, who was right in front of her. The question isn't whether or not she could scratch someone behind her but why she didn't scratch the guy right in front of her. No scratches on his arm at the ATM. I have also found it a little peculiar that for a half-hour one guy was in front, one guy was in back, and Mister 90% only got scratched for all his criminality.

    217 comments. Just so you know, no topic has ever generated this amount of comments over a sustained period like the Duke case has. I'm glad to provide the forum for you all. This thread is closing, I've started a new one here on the identification procedure, but you can use it for all things Duke. I'll keep new threads coming. If there's news, feel free to send me an email so I can get a new thread up sooner.