"Nothing to worry about, even if guilty"?

How about the threat of being found guilty, even if innocent, and spending 40+ years enjoying the hospitality of the North Carolina prison system?

How about having to spend tens of thousands of dollars on attorneys' fees?

How about being out $400,000 for the duration of the case?

How about having your and your family's personal information, pictures, home addresses available for every and any crackpot racist out there to target?

If you are open to the possibility that the accused are innocent, how can you be so callous?

Court is free. If you choose to be represented by an attorney, that's voluntary. This case, as I have said countless times, didn't require any attorneys. They are "churning."

It's a loan not a gift. If it doesn't get reduced, well, they've got the wrong judge.

Because being brought to trial simply means the raising of a question. It doesn't mean that the question has been answered. That's what juries do. I'm in favor of the process, because it represents the advance of civilization.

But by tying your thesis to an ex-felon...

What nobody wants to take me up and come up with the "maybe" ( you were so good with the tox report/daterape drug and the broom ) about where the used condoms ended up?

What is worse, public urination or grand theft auto and fleeing and eluding police?

PB, does this mean you would vote to acquit?

I'm in favor of the process, because it represents the advance of civilization.

She and her "boyfriends" are trash.

The boys are not.

She would have been less than three hours pregnant

Why?

Posted by inmyhumbleopinion May 24, 2006 02:00 PM

Jlvngstn posted: What is worse, public urination or grand theft auto and fleeing and eluding police?

Who was convicted of grand theft auto?

You are simply taunting people with this sort of thing --

and I suspect "reveling" in it too.

Don't blame defense attorneys. Their continuous dog-and-pony shows, which culminated Monday with the unseemly sight of a rape suspect brash-talking before live television cameras, are precisely what many zealous attorneys would do in the course of their represenation of a high-profile client. The ceaseless "official" announcements by these attorneys, who by definition do not have access to all of the facts of the case, are designed for one reason only. And that is to sell to potential jurors their narrative of the case -- that this is a story of sweet, innocent boys getting their lives ruined by a "nut and a slut", to use the obnoxious phrase .... If you read more into what the defense lawyers are saying now, you are fooling yourself...... But don't blame the prosecutor, either. After an early case blunder in which he promised more than he could deliver, Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong has generally resisted the temptation to ride the whirlwind of media coverage and duel it out with defense attorneys via the media.... Whom to blame? This case needs a judge like a hungry wolf needs a pork chop. It needs a judge to quickly issue a gag order that will end until trial the silliness we've seen over the past few weeks.

I'd guess by "the process" he meant evidence produced at an actual trial, not the research, analysis and specultion of blog commenters. I'd think people would want a little more information than we are all going on before casting a vote even on just a blog.

Well, a "working mother of two" of course. Oh, and don't forget "3.0 GPA student". And she "served" in the Navy! Good work ethics too, five dates! on a weekend no less.

Posted by Teresa May 24, 2006 02:51 PM

I think TalkLeft said she will provide this site for us to discuss the case but not to trash the accuser or the players.

What should one call a prostitute if one wishes to avoid symbolic villification?

It's one thing to be a whore making money, another thing to be a drunken whore whose audience finds her unattractive.

Calling the victim a Ho, whore or prostitute is symbolic villification. It's meant to label her, to degrade her, and to shame her. You ignore her other humanity, struggling mother and honor student trying to better her life.

My bigger point here is the inflation of whatever happened there into a symbology when the point should have been whether or not a crime had been committed.

You're being a hypocrite in two ways. First, your use of labels like "whore" show you use that same symbology yourself. Second if it wasn't for the symbology no one would care about this case, not even you. The Duke defenders wouldn't be out here if this was an alleged gang rape by a bunch of homeless bums, and neither would you. No one would care if the defendants weren't privileged white athletes. Why do you think the conservative press is so solidly on the side of the lacrosse team? It's not surprising that black female opinion makers feel similarly protective of the AV.

I repeat: It is sophistry to allege that she did not steal the car. She did.

And they were kind enough to reduce the charges so as not to take a mother from her children. Sounds like the CJ system was quite fair to her..........

In my estimation the risk of that (lax players being convicted) happening is lower than the risk that a mile wide meteor will hit the earth in the next ten years, creating a nuclear winter that kills us all off. After all, that's soething has actually happened before.

the unseemly sight of a rape suspect brash-talking before live television cameras

PB, does this mean you would vote to acquit?

If I were a juror and closing arguments had just ended today, of course I would acquit. But its a silly question, since I haven't heard Nifong's case.

It's just that an ugly little part of me, no doubt put there by some white ancestor, thinks that taking off your clothes and shaking your parts for a roomful of drunken frat boys is somewhere well past center on the consent continuum.

My own belief is that a woman has every right to turn down sex even when in the midst of it.

In 70+ interviews, and in various court filings, we've heard a good deal of Nifong's case. It's not as if he's been busy since his media barrage uncovering new evidence. He hasn't even found the time to check the accuser's cellphone.

ugly woman, unmarried, no sex since the Johnson administration

Most of what I have learned about the prosecution's case has come from the search warrants and the stuff dished by the defense.

All this lecturing about it being rape if the woman doesn't consent and invoking Elizabeth Cady Stanton is a subtle version of the race/gender card: If you don't agree with me, you are sexist/racist etc.

Posted by inmyhumbleopinion May 24, 2006 02:31 PM deleted

It's just that an ugly little part of me, no doubt put there by some white ancestor, thinks that taking off your clothes and shaking your parts for a roomful of drunken frat boys is somewhere well past center on the consent continuum.

I think the point of this case isn't "Can a stripper be a victim of rape" but "Is THIS stripper the victim of rape (or was there even any sex at all between her and the Duke boys?)"

All this lecturing about it being rape if the woman doesn't consent and invoking Elizabeth Cady Stanton is a subtle version of the race/gender card: If you don't agree with me, you are sexist/racist etc.

In his interviews, he described how the attack allegedly occurred (and even demonstrated it himself!)--critical for understanding this case. He assaulted the character of the team members--critical in a case like this, with so little evidence of a crime, since a jury would decide on the basis of credibility.

What nobody wants to take me up and come up with the "maybe" ( you were so good with the tox report/daterape drug and the broom ) about where the used condoms ended up?

He assaulted the character of the team members--critical in a case like this, with so little evidence of a crime

IMHO, did someone rile you up and you lost your temper?

I'm in disbelief!

Posted by Jlvngstn May 24, 2006 01:45 PM

deleted

Yet Nifong publicly stated that "if a condom were used" there might not be any DNA. This was after the police report noted the AV said no condoms were used. He lied to perpetuate the story.

I would assume she would have noticed if Reade S. had one though.

I'm not a man so I can't say, but if a rape such as this happened (not specific to this case) wouldn't a guy have trouble completing the act with other guys participating right there?

If I were a juror and closing arguments had just ended today, of course I would acquit. But its a silly question, since I haven't heard Nifong's case.

What I was really objecting to was Bob's use of the epithet "whore" to vilify the victim. Read my original post:

I'm not a man so I can't say, but if a rape such as this happened (not specific to this case) wouldn't a guy have trouble completing the act with other guys participating right there?

And yet, you made that crack about how unlikely it was that the lax players would be convicted. Despite not having heard Nifong's case. I just wondered whether you were being cynical, or sarcastic, or whether you actually think the defense has a case.

whether or not

See IMHO, I can make an argument for the AV/FA. Good one, eh?

Trials should be open and public.

And, IF these charges are false, then Nifong should be tared and feathered and run outa town on a rail.

Prosecutors, I believe, are ethically obliged to work in the interests of justice-i.e. not prosecute those they know are not guilty.

The women consented by showing up, taking off their clothes and shaking their "parts."

Del, sounds reasonable to me.

Is it really so bad to put three defendants through a trial?

Is it proper to use the word "wh*r*" to describe the AV if she is turning tricks?

What could Nifong still have that will win the day?

Well said, Del.

I'm trying to understand PB's ethical universe where false prosecutions are okay.

Right now there are a lot of poor black men (poor people generally) in prison for no better reason than they were charged for a crime and couldn't afford a decent lawyer.

Sorry, but I think that has pretty much been an invitation to penetration since the dawn of civilization.

That's exactly why guys want to look at it. And exactly why women performing such acts for money usually have protection, to make sure nothing happens.

My own belief is that a woman has every right to turn down sex even when in the midst of it.

Gee, I hope these men never travel to a country where clothes are less that optional and native everyday dances happen to get their jollies up. Then again, what? Will they just blame her for not "having protection"?

I'd like to give men a wee bit more credit and sense of responsibility than that...

Does a drunk person in a car, not driving, actually get in trouble or are they just taken somewhere to sober up?

Why did she wait until very near the end to choose [Finnerty]? She was almost out of options at that point.

Was it tissue or skin cells?

Should we always take defense attorneys' word for it the way a grand jury does a prosecutor's?

Del has a husband, so I am assuming Del is a woman. I could be wrong.

If I recall correctly, somebody actually suggested a woman removing her clothes in front of a man should expect so much (or something like that).

a country where clothes are less that optional and native everyday dances happen to get their jollies up.

Taking your clothes off and dancing provocatively is not an invitation to be sexually assaulted.

Well, it sort of is. Not strangled certainly, but---let me think of a word that will pass the censors---penetrated. Which is why strippers doing "outcalls" bring along a bodyguard. I still haven't heard a reason for why neither agency saw fit to send protection for their exotic dancers. There's the "they said there would only be five guys at the party" explanation, but after all, it allegedly only took three to rape the AV. My cynical husband suggested that the girls passed on the bodyguards because it would mean giving up part of the fee to them.

Well, it sort of is. Not strangled certainly, but---let me think of a word that will pass the censors---penetrated.

Well, it sort of is. Not strangled certainly, but---let me think of a word that will pass the censors---penetrated.

I know the difference between penetration and sexual assault. It's just that an ugly little part of me, no doubt put there by some white ancestor, thinks that taking off your clothes and shaking your parts for a roomful of drunken frat boys is somewhere well past center on the consent continuum.

Gee, I hope these men never travel to a country where clothes are less that optional and native everyday dances happen to get their jollies up.

Are you saying that a man might try to have sex with a stripper and that's to be expected, given the type of dancing and human nature? But that the stripper reserves the right to say no? That I can agree with, if that's what you mean.

Should the ones who do not serve jail time for rape? Theoretically speaking, should a woman who can prove that she turned down sex in the midst of it be able to claim rape and send the rapist to prison?

Del posted: Bunny Hole Entertainment is not producing National Geographic specials.

The bits we've heard about her injuries from the SANE report don't contradict anything we heard in the past.

"No condoms" could be consistent if her alleged attackers did not ejaculate inside her. I think it highly likely that only sperm DNA was tested for, except for the bodly tissue found under the fingernail.

If solid alibis really exist for the accused for most of the time the dancers were at the party (to cover all possible timelines, not just the defense version)...

Where are ANY pictures from the missing time? Why is the defense being so cagey with their pictures?

Picture if you will, first-time sex that's considerably more painful and frightening than expected, and the woman requests her partner to stop. In my opinion a decent man would stop. If he continues, is it rape? Maybe, technically. Is it a heinous crime? No. Was it wrong of him to continue? Yes. Should he go to prison? No. Is he a jerk? Probably.

If solid alibis really exist for the accused for most of the time the dancers were at the party (to cover all possible timelines, not just the defense version), wouldn't they have been leaked, and wouldn't the defense have found a way to make sure Nifong's nose was rubbed in it?

CHESHIRE: Well, I have been told who the indictments are against. I'm -- I'm not at liberty to mention those names. And, of course, the fact that I have been told that did not come directly from the prosecutor or any member of the grand jury or any member of -- of those staff. So, it's not a guaranty that it's the case. But I'm -- I'm pretty sure it is. ZAHN: What can you tell us about those two men? CHESHIRE: Well, they were two of the young men that were at the party. And, from what I understand it, the likelihood that these two men, with the facts that I understand, could have committed the crimes that this young woman has said that they committed, it would be almost impossible.

Finnerty has the best alibi of all. He did not go to the party at all.

Teresa posted:

Now that we know that she did in fact have sex with her boyfriend and her drivers or clients, I assume that this is admissable?

SLO, thanks for your long post. If I could control my hyperbole and write as articulately, dispassionately, and thoughtfully as you, maybe I wouldn't have irritated imho so much.

"A woman" removing her clothes for money in front of a group of men and dancing in the seclusion of their private residence with the specific intent of sexually arousing them as much as she possibly can, without also having a bouncer present to keep them all in line should expect ...

should expect that she is asking for trouble -- plain and simple.

I know the difference between penetration and sexual assault. It's just that an ugly little part of me, no doubt put there by some white ancestor, thinks that taking off your clothes and shaking your parts for a roomful of drunken frat boys is somewhere well past center on the consent continuum.

I did not say they consented. If they dragged her into the bathroom and did what she says they did, it's rape. But I did say the act of stripping is off-center on the consent continuum. I realize that could be seen as, what, sophistry? but I thought it was worth mentioning because:

I was responding to someone, hues of blue I think, who said that taking off one's clothes and dancing provocatively was not an invitation to penetration. Sorry, but I think that has pretty much been an invitation to penetration since the dawn of civilization. That's exactly why guys want to look at it. And exactly why women performing such acts for money usually have protection, to make sure nothing happens.

Are you saying that a man might try to have sex with a stripper and that's to be expected, given the type of dancing and human nature? But that the stripper reserves the right to say no? That I can agree with, if that's what you mean.

Yes, Lora, that's pretty much it.

How she could have sex with several clients willingly, claim "but with the ones at the party it was not voluntary," and not have to be questioned on why it was "voluntary" with some of her professional clients but not with others?

At the same time, I don't think it will come as a surprise that the consistent news coverage related to the men's lacrosse team seems to have had some effect on the number of students accepting our offer of admission. The recent controversy unfolded just as applicants were deciding where to attend college next year. By the time the admissions process concludes I expect our yield -- the percentage of students accepting our offer of admission -- to decrease somewhat from last year's 43 percent, to between 40 and 41 percent. We have seen a decrease of about 5 percent among both white and African-American students, but no decrease in yield among Latino and Asian students. ... We have seen no significant difference in yield among our top 300 applicants compared to last year. The enrollment model we've been using for the last several years consistently assumes that we will be able to enroll roughly 50 students from the waiting list; this year we expect to enroll an additional 125 students from the waiting list.

According to some posters here, and to the law, either one of these theoretically depicted women has the right to refuse sex.

even a woman at the furthest edge of your continuum might withold consent - and why she should have that right.

Sexual strip "teasing" of young men who are already under the influence of alcohol, but expecting each and every one of them to behave like a perfect, self-controlled little gentleman is not very realistic.

That's why all legitimate lounges have bouncers.

That is a loaded statement, and it contains a stereotype about "a woman" with which no reasonable person could disagree.

Cleared of the stereotype, however, it becomes a statement of pretty simple common sense. "A woman" removing her clothes for money in front of a group of men and dancing in the seclusion of their private residence with the specific intent of sexually arousing them as much as she possibly can, without also having a bouncer present to keep them all in line should expect ... should expect that she is asking for trouble -- plain and simple."

We are not talking about "natives" in Durham, we're talking about a professional outcall stripper, sex-worker in Durham.

Isn't there a "definition of rape" chatroom where you folks could take this discussion?

Never mind that this was her first strip party and she was only expecting 5 people.

[T]he time stamps are only as accurate as the clock in your camera; if you forgot to set it an hour ahead for daylight savings, your metadata would be an hour off. You can also modify any of the metadata with a simple computer command if you have the right software.

That doesn't mean it takes a serious computer hacker to adjust the numbers. Within a span of about 20 minutes, the Explainer was able to download a utility called ExifTool from the Web and edit the time stamps on all his photos: Each and every one now appears to have been taken at 12:30 a.m. on the night of the Duke lacrosse team party.

If a lawyer wants to use time-stamp metadata in court, he'll be much better off if the police seized the digital camera that took the pictures. That way he can argue that the pictures on the camera couldn't have been modified, and he can also demonstrate that the clock inside the camera wasn't improperly set.

The ultimate victim in this case will be the current array of rape shield laws. And maybe some of them should be tossed.

Are the Duke Lacrosse Photos Legit? Can the time stamps on the photos be faked? Yes.

If so, isn't she the same person who was also said that she wasn't a prostitute?

If so, isn't she the same person who was also said that she wasn't a prostitute?

Are you making this up? What's your source for this. I've never heard this before.

What if symptoms consistent with rape are also consistent with being a prostitute working a number of jobs over the weekend?

I suppose that it's always a matter of judgment, but how clear is the physical evidence to a trained professional? Does anyone know?

it seems possible that the AV's condition is not uncommon given certain consensual sexual practices and that the medical staff is instructed to label the medical evidence as consistent with rape whenever possible.

Outcall escort service is not the same thing as being a professional stripper performing in a legitimate dancing lounge, where bouncers are always present.

chew2, On what do you base this as being the AV's first strip party? Her word? Her sworn statement?

Would the fee increase for a larger party? Maybe they were just trying to scam the system. Like when you lie about how many people are going to be sharing the beach condo at spring break.

This woman was hospitalized for mental illness for a week last year.

None of these defense attorneys are going risk being disbarred and thrown in prison for tampering with evidence or presenting evidence that they know has been tampered with. They have no reason to be that desperate or stupid.

The team members lied about their names and who they were. This doesn't mean we should disbelieve everything they said.

Like they wouldn't risk saying the DNA came back negative when in fact it came back inconclusive? Like they wouldn't label somebody who wasn't even accused of a crime a "false accuser"? Like they wouldn't write a note to an article-writer that basically says, "hey, you shouldn't use the race-card. It isn't good!" and then, speaking out of the other side of their mouth, doing exactly that when referring to the OJ case?

Given the murky state of the evidence, is there any legal reason why Nifong can't dismiss the charges against one or all of the three, reconvene a grand jury, and then indict anyone whose case moves beyond the ham sandwich level?

When the test results come back inconclusive, an attorney's job is to say that the tests didn't establish a single match.

And if their whole premise is that the defendants aren't guilty, how is that any different than calling her a false accuser? That's the entire basis of their case!

Tampering with evidence on the other hand is a very serious crime. If caught, they would be arrested and run out of the legal profession in disgrace.

No, it is to show their client didn't do it. He called somebody not even charged with a crime a "false accuser" ... not a mistaken accuser, not a wrong accuser, not a mixed up accuser, but a false accuser. It isn't their job to show something didn't happen, it is to exonerate their client. Sorry, but that guy makes himself come off as an unhinged jack-a*s.

huesofblue posted: Spinning the evidence is what lawyers do. ....Tampering with evidence on the other hand is a very serious crime. If caught, they would be arrested and run out of the legal profession in disgrace.

The point is that people who find out it in fact was inconclusive (which, the fact that it came back inconclusive was open to anybody, yet the media and public who supposedly are "deciding the guilt of these boys before the trial!" [yeah, right!] largely ignored that) would see it not reflecting well on them. They know that. The risked it anyway.

No, it is to show their client didn't do it . . . It isn't their job to show something didn't happen, it is to exonerate their client. Sorry, but that guy makes himself come off as an unhinged jack-a*s.

...I mean, not shy enough not to suggest shoving a broom-handle up the women's a*s or making racist comments but ... shy.

A few posters here have hitched their yokes to that JA by calling the accuser a FA, themselves.

And NO! That is not the same thing as "she asked for it! -- i.e. consented to rape." It is saying that she was asking for trouble, meaning she put herself in a high risk situation without the proper safety precautions by not having a bouncer present, and no, that does not show good, common sense.

.. not a mistaken accuser, not a wrong accuser, not a mixed up accuser, but a false accuser.

Durga_is_my_homey, where have you been all of my Talk Left life?

...I mean, not shy enough not to suggest shoving a broom-handle up the women's a*s or making racist comments but ... shy.

You are over the top on this...

1. The comment was said it the context of sex toys and there has been no statement or suggestion by anyone they said "shoving" or that the broom would enter the "a*s". You are purposely inflaming the facts.

Victim: The guy bfore this one. he made the comment about the broomstick.

Sgt: #34 was the gentleman that made the broomstick comment.

Victim: Um hum.

Sgt: What was the comment about?

Victim: He said um he was going to stick broomsticks up your asses.

Durga has been hanging around feministing.com for awhile now commenting on various things including the Duke case.

If you think the defendants are alleged rapists/guilty players then call them "AR/GP" or "AR" or "GP" or whatever makes you feel better.

Imho, since we are discussing the act of stripping (not this particular stripper), the continuum I so unfortunately mentioned is non-verbal. So, the NO end would be a nun dressed in full habit, telling her beads in her lonely cell behind a twelve-foot convent wall. The YES end would be a woman alone in a bedroom with a man, wearing nothing but a garter belt and high heels, sprawled in a Penthouse-style pose, licking her upper lip with her pretty pink tongue. I see performing an "exotic dance" in a private residence as closer to the latter than the former.

According to some posters here, and to the law, either one of these theoretically depicted women has the right to refuse sex.

I know the difference between penetration and sexual assault. It's just that an ugly little part of me, no doubt put there by some white ancestor, thinks that taking off your clothes and shaking your parts for a roomful of drunken frat boys is somewhere well past center on the consent continuum.

According to some posters here, and to the law, either one of these theoretically depicted women has the right to refuse sex.

...even a woman at the furthest edge of your continuum might withold consent - and why she should have that right.

I agree that she should have that right. What I am interested in debating is if she should have the full weight of the country's justice system behind her refusal.

No, I am not intentionally making anything up, and I don't really have the energy to look back to find my source for this, but I thought it was common knowledge. If I am wrong, I apologize.

It's interesting how little compassion the core of pro-AVs here seem to have towards other posters. There is always a presumption of evil against people who may not be as strident as they are in their belief that the AV was raped. If someone writes anything that they can get their little claws into, they rip rip rip.

But she is charging, without question, that she was raped by these fellows. If her accusation is "false", then the title seems appropriate.

...can we also agree to stop discussing imho's tendency to scan through 48 or more hours of postings to find precisely the scary thoughts he/she wants to showcase?

even a woman at the furthest edge of your continuum might withold consent - and why she should have that right.

I agree that she should have that right. What I am interested in debating is if she should have the full weight of the country's justice system behind her refusal.

IMHO, I'd suggest you reread your posts for proof but you wouldn't get it anyway.

1. The comment was said it the context of sex toys and there has been no statement or suggestion by anyone they said "shoving" or that the broom would enter the "a*s". You are purposely inflaming the facts.

2. No one knows and no one has said who threw the first salvo of racist insults. Kim supposedly made derogatory comments about their white manhood...why is that not racist? Why is one insult OK and the other not?

Black people call each other n*gg*r all the time, especially in publicly broadcast and available rap music. PLease explain to me and all why this is acceptable and not racist? Does this mean that if they sang their insults it wouldn't be racism?

If you are going to throw the race card why don't you start with your abhorance of this.

But she is charging, without question, that she was raped by these fellows. If her accusation is "false", then the title seems appropriate.

The AV shouldn't be an icon for the feminism unless you're planning on crashing feminism, in which case I'm sure the reactionaries will thank you for all your hard work.

IMHO, I said look at your own posts. You didn't get it. Ask me again. You still won't get it.

Posted by inmyhumbleopinion May 25, 2006 07:53 AM http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/05/admissions.html Thanks Guys, looks like an extra 125 of the "best and brightest" said, "Thanks, but, no thanks, Duke." He then posted a portion of a letter from the admissions officer to the Duke President regarding their success in admissions. At the same time, I don't think it will come as a surprise that the consistent news coverage related to the men's lacrosse team seems to have had some effect on the number of students accepting our offer of admission. The recent controversy unfolded just as applicants were deciding where to attend college next year. By the time the admissions process concludes I expect our yield -- the percentage of students accepting our offer of admission -- to decrease somewhat from last year's 43 percent, to between 40 and 41 percent. We have seen a decrease of about 5 percent among both white and African-American students, but no decrease in yield among Latino and Asian students. ... We have seen no significant difference in yield among our top 300 applicants compared to last year. The enrollment model we've been using for the last several years consistently assumes that we will be able to enroll roughly 50 students from the waiting list; this year we expect to enroll an additional 125 students from the waiting list.

Lisa Meltzer of Rome, Ga., said the lacrosse case prompted her family to cross Duke off the list for her son Zach, a rising junior at the Darlington School in Rome. Duke's administration hasn't supported lacrosse team members, she said, and it was too quick to cancel the lacrosse season and accept the resignation of its coach. "We were very gung-ho to come to Duke," Meltzer said. But now, she said, "There is no way I would allow my child to come into the city limits of Durham."

Even after weeks of relentless media coverage of the Duke men's lacrosse scandal, the university has managed to enroll the most competitive class on record for the fall

Still, Duke has attracted more minority students overall, increasing students of color from 37 percent last year to 40 percent this year.

What, besides the AV's good word, is evidence that a rape occurred at the Buchanan house that night?

Once again, IMHO seems incapable of entertaining more than one hypothesis to explain the world. While one can argue that some potential students decided to matriculate at another school because of the Duke Mens Lacrosse team, a more likely alternative hypothesis is that they were unwilling to risk their well-being in the city of Durham, with Mike Nifong as District Attorney.

IMHO - you're obviously bright, articulate, a strong advocate, and have way too much time on your hands -but your training in law is vastly different than mine in scientific method. Thus, for me, your inability to consider alternative explanations limits the effectiveness of your arguments.

It's easy to explain the world when you only look at it from one perspective, it's takes more effort to be open-minded and actively consider alternative explanations.

consistent news coverage related to the men's lacrosse team seems to have had some effect on the number of students accepting our offer of admission.

a more likely alternative hypothesis is that they were unwilling to risk their well-being in the city of Durham, with Mike Nifong as District Attorney.

but your training in law is vastly different than mine in scientific method.

Broom-handle = sex toys? Nice, remember that one for the future and try to use it on somebody. It reportedly wasn't done in a jokey, cheeky manner. It was consistently reported as "shoving".

Once again, IMHO seems incapable of entertaining more than one hypothesis to explain the world. While one can argue that some potential students decided to matriculate at another school because of the Duke Mens Lacrosse team, a more likely alternative hypothesis is that they were unwilling to risk their well-being in the city of Durham, with Mike Nifong as District Attorney.

I don't think it will come as a surprise that the consistent news coverage related to the men's lacrosse team seems to have had some effect on the number of students accepting our offer of admission.

I didn't say one was okay and one wasn't, did I? However, the fact remains corroborating statements suggest somebody actually said, "thank your grandpa for my cotton shirt" yet when it is suggested that saying such a thing reflects badly on the "boys", it's, "oh, the race card! The race card!". Well ... he did say it.

Oh, take the tu quoque somewhere else. They said that all, is was what they did. People are just trying to make excuses so that somehow they are not responsible for what they said.

Oh, you're just playing the You're Just Play the Race Card card!

Seligmann's attorney did this, and all it got him was an announcement from Nifong that he planned to change the timeline (from his arrest warrant, which listed the crime occurring on March 14) to his still-unrevealed "my timeline"

The only way I would continue if I were her would be if I were telling the truth. Then when the defense came after me I'd pitch such a hissy fit the judge would have to put me in jail. :) I would not give up under any circumstances if it's true.

Now it turns out that the AV at some point claimed that Roberts was in the bathroom with her while she was being raped.

"I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told," Arico said.

I believe Nifong said: they don't know my timeline, not: I plan to change the timeline.

But Pat, INMHO didn't offer a hypothesis in his post (at least not in the part you quoted), he just posted the letter that said:

Thanks Guys, looks like an extra 125 of the "best and brightest" said, "Thanks, but, no thanks, Duke."

Based on what, your own prejudices and dislike of Nifong, a name that hardly any applicant is likely to recognize?

What does your alleged scientific training have to do with the validity of your alternative hypothesis? Some reasoning would lend your claim some better credibility. I doubt that you can propose a test that would distinguish these between those two "competing" hypotheses which you have invented on your own.

The AV's nails were found in the bathroom, which is may be consistent with the struggle she described to police.

The SANE nurse found physical symptoms consistent with rape, including bruises and swelling. An*l swelling might not be easily countered with evidence of recent prior activites.

We have the testimony of two witnesses (and possibly more if you include the driver) that the AV appeared sober at the start of the party, but that her condition rapidly deteriorated in a manner consistent with being drugged with a date rape drug.

You have a number of witnesses to the AV's hysterical behavior in the hours after the party. I'm sure some expert will testify as to how that behavior is consistent with the trauma the AV alleges.

You have a player at the party threatening to sexually assault the AV with a broomstick (though more likely, it was a lacrosse stick)

DNA found under one of the AV's nails is consistent with that of one of the defendants, though not conclusive.

The two women danced for a few minutes before Roberts stopped after a player held up a broomstick and suggested a sex act. Through lawyers, the players have said they felt cheated after paying $800 for a few minutes of dancing

Question, did Nifong say the defense had everything that could be exculpatory, or everything that he had, period? I thought I remember something about "exculpatory" but I'm not sure.

"If there was a toxicology report available, it would've been included in the discovery I handed over to the defense," Nifong told WRAL on Monday. Nifong told WRAL he had turned over all the evidence he has to-date and that when any new reports or documents come in, they too, would be handed over to the defense.

Kali, Bissey witnessed this part of the argument. Did he hear Kim yell that comment to the guys?

Even the defense team themselves originally said the dancing was stopped due to "offensive remarks."

There has been recent scoffing at the supposed attitudes of some "women" posters and some AV "sympathizers." I think this tends to happen when we make good arguments. It's common to attack the speaker when you cannot attack the statements.

"At some point in their interviews and investigations, one or more of these officers asked (the accuser) to describe the men who she claims sexually assaulted her, and (she) provided some answer to that question," the motion filed by lawyers Bill Cotter and Wade Smith said. ... District Attorney Mike Nifong gave defense lawyers nearly 1,300 pages of evidence last week, saying it was his complete case file. ... Smith and Cotter argue in their motion filed in Durham Superior Court that can't be true. They say that there's only one instance in the evidence they've been given when the accuser is asked to describe her attackers. ... The response is contained in what appears to be an investigator's note, they said. ... "I asked her questions trying to follow up on a better description of the suspects, she was unable to remember anything further about the suspects," the note from Durham police investigator B.W. Himan says, according to the motion.

The whole point of science is constant questioning and the development of alterative hypotheses.

If the indictments were to be dismissed because of a technicality and people here were on the Durham Grand Jury, would the posters here indict these three men for rape given the standard of evidence required for an indictment?

Bob In Pacifica posted:

Durga commented: A week? Gee, hell of a mental illness.

Actually, it probably is. Go check on your insurance policy and see how long they'll hospitalize you to kick back and rest. Being hospitalized for a week would indicate being highly suicidal or having a break with reality. Just being kinda wacky .... [or] ... Just being exhausted doesn't get you hospitalized unless you've got the bucks to go to Betty Ford's.

Chesycho

Finally, IMHO, with regard to capitalizing the ATTACK position for Finnerty, whether you copied it or not is not the issue - you knew, or should have known, that capitalizing would attract attention. If you don't want to be responsible for what you post, then provide proper attribution at the time you post it.

Further, IMHO, in your response, you purposely capitalized Finnerty's position as ATTACK - I for one have grown tired of you constant distortions - get a grip. Would you have capitalized his position if he played defense?

What evidence do we have that either one of them is a reliable witness? I'm sorry, but both of those women make their living in an illegal profession.

Now it turns out that there was no toxicology report. So there is no evidence, apparently, that the woman was intoxicated.

It's interesting that you suggest the AV's apparent intoxication being proof (well, I asked for proof, but I'll take whatever you have) that someone may have drugged her.

How does 'not conclusive' reach the standard of beyond reasonable doubt? How many out of the total population share the same genetic markers with Evans? How likely is it that the trashcan in Evans' bathroom would not contain his DNA? How likely is that one object in the said trashcan would not touch another object and thereby acquire DNA? Wikipedia is interesting on DNA fingerprinting, although it obviously does not answer these questions.

What is likely is that the 1 1/2 drinks she popunded down in a matter of minutes between arrival and dancing contained about 6-9 ounces of alcohol (12 oz cups, hard-partying college strength pours). She looks to be a small girl (5'3", 115 lbs)...this would hit her quickly in about 5 minutes and have her stumbling, passed out drunk in about 20-30 minutes. This would be compounded if she smoked, popped or drank something before she arrived. . . . 99% of the time women in their formers careers use alcohol or drugs . . . .

Unfortunately, I don't think the average high school senior (or perhaps his or her overprotective parents), even the best and brightest, will always be as rational.

... 1 1/2 drinks isn't going to leave her falling down drunk ...

... it took a lot longer than 5 minutes for it to kick in ...

... took a lot more than 6 ounces of liquor to get her ...

She may have drugged herself, obviously. If I had to do what she did, I sure as hell would be high enough that I wouldn't remember what I did the next morning.

Come to think of it

The adm. initially encouraged the players to talk to Nifong without lawyers, the faculty who made public comments behaved as if the players were all but certainly guilty,

With full honesty, I can say it is my intention, the student loan gods willing, to begin graduate school at Duke next fall.

If that's what a $40,000 tuition gets you, a Duke education isn't a very good bargain.

The [AV] said she and another dancer sent by a second escort service stopped dancing because several men at the party yelled a racial slur. In a court document used to obtain DNA samples from lacrosse team members, the woman said one man in the room threatened to sexually assault her with a broom handle.

While [the AV] and the other dancer started to perform the men started making racial slurs and became aggressive.

I have to tell you what I find perhaps the most reprehensible: Nifong's arrest of the Sudanese cabbie. But more so, the total lack of outrage by any of the AV supporters here, the local community, the opportunist activists.

I get the feeling from the women on this very website that they feel men are suppose to be able to take this kind of stuff, and they seem to not have any respect when it comes mens reputations...

It's interesting how little compassion the core of pro-AVs here seem to have towards other posters. There is always a presumption of evil against people who may not be as strident as they are in their belief that the AV was raped. If someone writes anything that they can get their little claws into, they rip rip rip.

The more the Pro-AVs speak in rhetorical generalities, the less of a case the AV seems to have. The AV shouldn't be an icon for the feminism unless you're planning on crashing feminism, in which case I'm sure the reactionaries will thank you for all your hard work.

"I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told," Arico said.

I believe Nifong said: they don't know my timeline, not: I plan to change the timeline.

I remember him saying that as well, and finding it very problamatic. If the accused are guilty, and Nifong's timeline is correct, one would assume the accused know Nifong's timeline. If they don't know his timeline, how can it be right?!?

noname, I assume Nifong would have had to give his timeline to the defense as part of his 1200-odd page book, no? I don't know.

SharonInJax May 25, 2006 09:32 PM hues: ever done X?

This fiasco will be gone from the collective conscience of the US as soon as there is a major nationwide news story to change the cycle...the Ken Lay & Jeff Skilling verdicts may do it.

Teresa, Why would the physical evidence have to be greater? Are paying clients more likely to be rougher than non-paying partners?

Perception, in the case of the intangibles in life--like reputation, support, etc. is often tantamount to reality. (Perception, in the case of this particular rape case, might not always be reality, as evidenced by ~99.4% of the comments posted on this blog). So putting yourselves in the position of those students whose decision to attend or not attend Duke boils down to perceptions of the school, how would you categorize your perceptions of Duke as an institution BEFORE the incident (let's say March 12) and CURRENTLY (post-incident, i fear, will only come after the trial)?

huesofblue posted:

The testimony of multiple witnesses describing the victim as intoxicated is plenty of evidence of intoxication.

A self induced high is possible, but there just aren't that many drugs that'll leave you in the state that I can really imagine the AV taking before a show.

Roberts said that she thought the other woman arrived sober. But when the two began their strip show around midnight, the other woman began having trouble. "She started stumbling," recalled Roberts. "When I think back on it, she had a glassy look in her eyes." Roberts says she "gave her a look that said, 'C'mon, girl, what's going on?' "--but got no response.

It is still a privilege, for me, to say that I graduated from Duke University.

No, not that many, but enough. Drugs for anxiety would do it -- Xanax, Valium, taken in sufficient dose 45 minutes to an hour before the party. Taken with alcohol, they would produce very similar effects. And she could well have been very nervous about doing her first -- how should I say this delicately? -- her first "real" group strip tease dance.

[I}remember a night when she and her friends were just knocking back the shots. She got destroyed and ended up throwing up on me in the back of a car. But the thing is, it took a lot longer than 5 minutes for it to kick in and it took a lot more than 6 ounces of liquor to get her to the point where she was even stumbling drunk.

I still don't follow. A healthy active woman doesn't have to be a prostitute to have plenty of sex. That's why I'm questioning your premise that she'd have to show more physical evidence.

There is nothing but the the AV's testimony that a rape occurred