This person's identity is not relevant either to the medical examination or for the initial findings of the crime laboratory and should not be sought at time of initial examination. The patient should, however, be instructed to remember the identity of that person and how to reach him should a blood or hair sample be needed later.

He said he did not check on the accuser's children or tell her parents where she was. "I told her I would, but I didn't," he said. "I don't know her that well."

No need to be smug about how the AV's testimony wasn't needed for indictments.

Why would it be necessary to avoid naming Kim if the case were made public? Is that a common police practice? And if the AV referred Kim as Nikki, what name would be required to be reported?

Anyway, setting aside my theory, I do not see anything wrong AT ALL with an exotic dancer using a stage name. It is a dangerous line of work where you come into contact with many anonymous men. I also see little-to-no basis for assuming that AV was confused about the name.

imho: may be proper protocol for the SANE process, but Nifong or the cops should have asked her before, or contemporaneously with, getting samples from the entire team, don't you think? And "initial findings of the crime laborotory" is probably not DNA testing, but standard blood type, fibers, hairs, etc.

If the boyfriend's DNA was not collected until two weeks after the Duke players' indictments, does that mean Nifong did not know that the AV had consensual sex "recently"? Did he forget to ask the AV, or did the AV lie to him?

We don't know if the accuser told the SANE nurse of her recent sexual activity, although it seems unlikely, since Nifong didn't initially ask for DNA from the three men.

It would also be hard to believe that an honest judge of fact would not find it disturbing that the claimant of rape may have been concealing a number of other sexual events in her very recent past which could have explained the symptoms noted by the nurse consistent with rape.

To be specific, it appears that the AV was not truthful about her prior sexual activity to the police/DA. Thus, when the second round of DNA results found evidence from someone other than the players, I assume the AV was then asked to revisit her initial statements about previous sexual activity.

But it does still leave me wondering if "Nikki" was the AVs construct, or the officer's.

While victims of other crimes can feel guilt and shame as a result of their victimization, it is more common and often more pronounced in victims of sexual assault.

How likely is it that a *prostitute* would be reduced to hysteria by shame and guilt because she was dicked without her consent?

"She would not speak with us, we did not know her name or where she lived. Taking her home was not an option. She would not walk on her own, so 24 hour hold was not an option. I determined that the Durham Access Center would be an appropriate option because she met the criteria for involuntary commitment."

"After Officer Barfield had been at Durham Access for a while, he called me and stated the female said she had been raped at 610 N. Buchanan."

"She told me that she worked as a stripper and that she had been hired through "Angels[?] Escort Service" to dance with another female at 610 N. Buchanan."

"She said that she and "Nikki" danced and "put on a show" for the men at the party. She said that they left and got into "Nikkis" car. At that time, she said that someone from the party wanted them to come back into the house."

"She said at that point some of the guys from the party pulled her from the party and groped her."

"She told me that no one forced her to have sex."

"She then mentioned that someone had taken her money."

"I continued to the room where she was and asked her if she had or had not been raped. She told me she did not want to talk to me anymore and then started crying and saying something about them dragging her into the bathroom."

She HAS to take the stand: she has no choice if there is a trial.

Nifong didn't need [the accuser's] testimony because he ... did not give them DNA results (for Seligman/Finnerty) or potential alibis, didn't even let the Grand Jury hear testimony from the men they might indict, and got them to indict ham sandwiches.

The sad part is that there is still a case in the courts.

I'll ask this again: What, besides one version of her narrative of what happened that night, is evidence that a rape happened and that those three men committed it. Anyone?

With a little effort, we could lobby Congress for a "Bob in Pacifica" amendment, which would allow you, or other qualified bloggers with similar sensibilities and research skills, to review select evidence prevented by the defense team.

Among the critical, workable reforms detailed in that report are: (1) the right to counsel for grand jury witnesses who are not receiving immunity; (2) an obligation to present evidence which may exonerate the target or subject of the offense; and (3) the right for targets or subjects to testify. In response to reported abuses, several states, New York and Massachusetts among them, have successfully added these well-considered features to their grand jury systems.

When the American colonies declared their independence from England, the grand jury was a vibrant institution that protected individual citizens from overweening government. The modern grand jury not only fails to perform the function for which it was originally designed, it does the complete opposite. Federal prosecutors now use the façade of the "grand jury process" to initiate and pursue investigations of which the grand jury has little or no knowledge and over which it has no oversight or control. Regrettably, that façade has also been used to bypass the constitutional rights of citizens.

When the American colonies declared their independence from England, the grand jury was a vibrant institution that protected individual citizens from overweening government. The modern grand jury not only fails to perform the function for which it was originally designed, it does the complete opposite.

I don't think much of the AV or her story but I am getting tired of reading about how she tried to run over a cop. I think it is much more likely that while she was trying to get away she came close to hitting a cop, I doubt she was trying to hit him. People who flee from the police in car chases often put innocents at risk but they are rarely trying to hurt anybody they are just trying to get away.

Vann also said that the allegations that that his former client was trying to hit the sheriff's deputy were in error, and that she was merely trying to turn around. The case was resolved when she admitted she made a mistake, paid restitution and served probation and some jail time.

"I would be glad to go to bat for her," Vann said. "She was a very credible, believable person and deserves that sort of respect in this situation now."

She said that she and "Nikki" danced and "put on a show" for the men at the party. She said that they left and got into "Nikkis" car. At that time, she said that someone from the party wanted them to come back into the house."

This is all consistent with what we've heard before, with the possible exception of sitting in the car being NEW, NOT INCONSISTENT information.

Their constant presence is "extraordinarily telling," said Cheshire. He said unindicted players and their lawyers would not be sticking together unless "every single one of them knows that they're innocent."

"You're talking about young men running the risk of being kicked out of college, of having their names in the newspapers and losing jobs, and they're standing in there because they know what the truth is," Cheshire said. "And the lawyers are standing in there because they've reviewed this case with great care and they know what the truth is."

"You have to understand that obviously the defense attorneys would probably prefer to try the case against somebody who is less experienced than I am, or get somebody who is less committed to the case than I am, and you can certainly understand that," he said. "I mean, if I were one of those attorneys, I wouldn't really want to try a case against me either."

Did the Grand Jury at the time it was a vibrant institution allow defendants to present evidence, witnesses to testify without representation, and did it mandate prosecutors to present exculpatory evidence? Because it seems to me that what is being lobbied for is here simply a that there be a double secret trial before there is a public trial. A jobs for lawyers program that gives defense attorneys a little more clout

But beginning about 1910 or so, the grand jury ceased to operate so independently. As the government began to regulate the grand jury more and more, the grand jury became "captured." The practice of allowing a prosecutor to investigate crime allegations and then present his evidence for indictment before the grand jury became routine and evolved into such standard practice that by the end of the nineteenth century it had become a part of "normal" grand jury operations. While previously the prosecutor often did not get a case until after indictment, now he was frequently allowed to present evidence before the grand jury personally. By the turn of the twentieth century, according to one commentator, "with the prosecutor inside the grand jury room, the purposes of grand jury secrecy were no longer apparent."[78] As the grand jury slowly lost its full historic purpose, grand juries became resigned to a minute corner of the American justice system. American grand juries ceased to initiate their own investigations."Dramatic, sometimes violent confrontations between grand juries and prosecutors, politicians, legislatures, even within the grand juries themselves, became largely things of the past by about the 1930's."[79]

According to her attorney at the time, Woody Vann, she was turning around on a dead end road. She did not touch the officer with her vechicle. It was plead to a misdemeanor.

She eventually was indicted on three felonies, along with a misdemeanor and we reached a plea agreement to where she pled guilty to four misdemeanors, one of them being driving while impaired and she was placed on probation and was requested, directed to serve a six days active in jail and ordered to pay a substantial amount of restitution for damage to vehicles.

It was pled to four misdemeanors.

According to her attorney at the time, Woody Vann, she was turning around on a dead end road. She did not touch the officer with her vehicle. It was plead to a misdemeanor. Bob in Pacifica knows this, yet he recently has said, "she was apparently willing to kill a cop." It's what he does.

Posted by Alan May 29, 2006 06:51 AM imho posted:

The decision to tell a police officer you've been raped is one I wouldn't think someone would want to make at the spur of the moment.

Alan, I didn't post that.

It is true that Nifong has a reputation for stubbornness. It would be interesting to see if he is stubborn enough to try this case without the complainent's willing participation. He doesn't have to provide an exit strategy for anyone including himself. And maybe he actually won't.

to inmyhumbleopinion

I'm not embarrassed by your clarifications.

The decision to tell a police officer you've been raped is one I wouldn't think someone would want to make at the spur of the moment.

...especially after reading the comments here.

How likely is it that a *prostitute* would be reduced to hysteria by shame and guilt because she was dicked without her consent?

IMHO writes about the AV trying to run over a cop: She did not touch the officer with her vechicle. It was plead to a misdemeanor.

It would be interesting to do a study on the wealth of the families of the various lacrosse players and see if Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans are at the top of the heap.

The majority of the players come from middle-class, suburban families (there are a few players from both very wealthy and from working-class settings)

None of the misconduct involved fighting, sexual assault or harassment, or racial slurs.

Captain Sarvis said the types of student behavior about which residents of District 2 complained included late-night noise and loud parties, excessive drinking, littering, public urination, and some damage to cars parked in the neighborhoods. None of the complaints related to physical assaults of any type.

Meanwhile, the woman's two school-age children are trying to keep their routine, spending parts of each day with their grandparents, he said, as he waited for the children to arrive in their school bus.

The sheriff's deputy said he got out of his car and told the woman to turn off the car. She laughed, backed up the car, then drove forward again and nearly hit the deputy, the report said

Posting by Bob In Pacifica May 29, 2006 10:18 AM

Re: If the AV fabricated the rape story, what is her motivation?

At any point, if she had been capable and cooperative (and I'm basing her ability to be so on Shelton's remarks) she could have told Shelton where she lived. She may have been able to tell Roberts where she lived earlier. Uncooperative suggests an unwillingness, not an inability.

Most of the discipline imposed by the coach consisted of additional running. In one case, however, the Coach suspended two players from participating in the 2005 post-season, including play in the championship game. The players were not permitted to wear team uniforms or to sit with the team.

Date of Last Coitus When analyzing semen specimens in sex-related crimes, forensic analysts sometimes find genetic markers which are inconsistent with a mixture from only the victim and the assailant. A mixture of semen from an assailant and the victim's previous sexual partner could lead to blood grouping results which, if unexplained, could conflict with the victim's own account of the assault. Forensic analysts request that examiners ask victims if they engaged in other sexual intercourse within one week prior to the assault. If so, victims are then asked the date of the contact in order to help determine the possible significance of semen remaining from the prior sexual contact. As with all procedures, it is important to explain to the victim why this information is needed. Otherwise, the victim may interpret these questions as unnecessarily intrusive into events not related to the assault. The recollections of the victim may become less accurate if they go unsolicited until after the crime laboratory identifies discrepancies between the assailant(s) DNA profile and the DNA profile of the seminal stains. In some cases, several months may elapse between the initial medical examination, the crime laboratory analysis, and the follow- up interview with the prosecutor and victim. Therefore, obtaining this information as soon as possible is highly important.

And while being questioned, the dancer "passed out and was unresponsive," McCrae said.

I wonder how often trying "to kill a cop" is pled to a misdemeanor?

The taxi slammed into the deputy's car and kept going...

Since this is all speculation, please don't expect proof of anything.

But District Attorney Mike Nifong, who is handling the rape case, and who was an assistant prosecutor in 2002, said Wednesday he had nothing to do with the plea deal four years ago. He said he didn't know which local prosecutor negotiated it.

The problem, Lora, is that in order for you to conclude that there are not several inconsistencies, you have had to fabricate the contents of two whole interviews, ending with the totally imaginary assumtion that Shelton blows the victim off as she tries to tell her story, and you even throw in your own personal snark for good measure: " Way to go, Shelton."

"I continued to the room where she was and asked her if she had or had not been raped. She told me she did not want to talk to me anymore and then started crying and saying something about them dragging her into the bathroom."

"I spoke with a Duke Police lieutenant who had one of their officers go by the house to see if they could determine who lived at the house and confirm that the resident(s) was a student at Duke. The watch commander told me that C.I.D. had been notified. I left the hospital at that time..."

It's hard to see how the indictment of ham sandwiches at the instance and under the exclusive control of the prosecutor serves the interests of justice. Hyperbole about double secret trials does not make the unfairness of the procedure, and the consequent prejudice to both complainant and defendant, disappear.

PB posted: Re: grand jury indictments. Will innocent people be brought to trial via this process? Sure. But as a society we long ago determined that that is not a bad thing.

Society did not, however, determine that innocent people who want a speedy trial should have to wait over a year to get it. And that is a bad thing

Which is why some states like California don't use the grand jury for that purpose. Instead they hold a preliminary hearing -- in which both sides get to speak -- to determine whether or not there is sufficient evidence to bind a case over for trial.

Sharon, imho's instructions are very confusing, and probably the cause of your problems. Here's the right way to do it:

All that stuff imho wrote about opening the URL box again to "close the tag" is very confusing, and just not needed if you do it the right way to begin with.

That being the case, it is extremely important that grand jurors be free from the undue influence-peddling of the defendant.

Its going to be a long day if people are already being defensive and quibbling over how to post a link.

I do know that unbridled prosecutorial discretion worries me.

Its going to be a long day if people are already being defensive and quibbling over how to post a link.

The reason Grand Juries were created was so that District Attorneys wouldn't have unbridaled prosecutorial power. Instead they have to filter their prosecutorial visions through the eyes of a general public.

Criticism of the Grand Jury System In this country numerous studies undertaken to assess the efficacy of the grand jury have all concluded that it is no longer effective in protecting individuals against arbitrary prosecutions, and that it no longer exercises the independent judgment required by due process. The landmark study in this century was conducted by Dean Wayne Morse of the University of Oregon Law School. After an exhaustive study of 7,414 indictments and extensive questionnaires sent to prosecutors and judges, Dean Morse concluded: Grand juries are likely to be a fifth wheel in the administration of criminal justice in that they tend to stamp with approval, and often uncritically, the wishes of the prosecuting attorney. At best the grand jury tends to duplicate the work of the committing magistrate and prosecutor.[20] Dean Morse found that in only 5.15 percent of the cases initiated by the prosecutor in which he expressed an opinion was there a disagreement between the opinion of the prosecutors and the grand jury dispositions.[21] Similarly, the National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement concluded: The grand jury usually degenerates into a rubber stamp wielded by the prosecuting officer according to the dictates of his own sense of propriety and justice. [The grand jury] has ceased to perform or be needed for the function for which it was established. [22] These findings are reinforced by Professor Moley who determined that the prosecutor "seems to dominate the grand jury to such a degree that its actions are in reality his own . . . ."[23]

Jo posted: Can't the defense attorneys ask a judge for the case to be dismissed if there isn't enough (or any) evidence against his clients?

The reason Grand Juries were created was so that District Attorneys wouldn't have unbridaled prosecutorial power. Instead they have to filter their prosecutorial visions through the eyes of a general public.

Do we know who prosecuted the 2002 incident and signed off on the plea bargain?

People who claim that the AV's story about being pulled out of the car and groped but not forced to have sex should remember that it is not part of anyone else's narrative of events of the evening. Specifically, neither the driver who took her to the party, Roberts who was in the car with her, nor Bissey saw a group of men pulling the AV out of a car, much less groping her.

People who claim that the AV's story about being pulled out of the car and groped but not forced to have sex should remember that it is not part of anyone else's narrative of events of the evening. Specifically, neither the driver who took her to the party, Roberts who was in the car with her, nor Bissey saw a group of men pulling the AV out of a car, much less groping her.

Its going to be a long day if people are already being defensive and quibbling over how to post a link.

I tried to defuse the situation, Kali, but to no avail. Obviously, I need to figure it out before things escalate any further.

the accuser was part of a "cell" Nifong had lying in wait in case he was ever appointed DA and would later have to win an election to stay in office?

The problem with a blog/email is lack of tone.