home

Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread

Yesterday's Duke lacrosse thread generated 300 comments, so it's time for another. And a commenter got banned and had all his/her comments deleted because of repetitive insults to other commenters. So be forwarned, disagreement is fine, name-calling and personal attacks are not.

< Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse | Dinner With Murray >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by Lora on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 11:19:40 PM EST
    For those of you who think the medical reports will really show no injuries, anyone remember this? I posted this quote on May 4 (I also took out a quote that some posters thought was not specific to this case): Theresa Arico, sexual assault nurse examiner and coordinator of Duke Hospital program (Herald-sun via NCCU Eagles fan page): <
    strong>"I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told."
    Do you really think that the head of the SANE program would say that if there wasn't back-up for it? I don't.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 11:41:58 PM EST
    Lora I don't think it's final proof. (I resisted the temptation to ask which story) I could cite the various defence motions as a counter-argument. The Cheshire motion, in particular, seems to go into great detail. We'll know when and if the medical report eventually becomes public. Until then we're whistling in the dark and we tend to read second-order interpretations according to the tenor of our overall beliefs about the case.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:12:32 AM EST
    With all due respect to Ms. Arico's professionalism, I find this a rather tepid endorsement of the accuser's story (whichever one it was). Lora, it doesn't require some extraordinary backup, because simply, it is NOT an extraordinary claim (unlike a condomless rape which yields no perpetrator DNA): "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told." It's a CYA statement. I would guess, though I do not claim to know for sure, that within neither the SANE report nor Ms. Arico's press was any other possibility considered. Nobody wants to know/ask: "Well, with what else can these injuries be consistent?" Well, I would like to know, but I'm never going to discover that in a SANE report. As I understand it, the SANE program is supposed to provide support for alleged victims of rape (from what I have seen, this is its highest priority, and why not?), to improve data collection procedures using trained nurses, and to turn over stronger forensic results with which prosecutors can get better rates of conviction. But I see a huge problem, which is a lack of control subjects and blind (couldn't really be double blind--that's cruel) studies. To wit, the concluding paragraph of a summary of the effectiveness of SANE programs from 2004: "...it appears that SANE programs are having beneficial effects on rape survivors' psychological well-being and they are improving the prosecution rates of sexual assault crimes. However, such conclusions are tentative because most published studies have not included adequate methodological controls or comparisons to rigorously test the effectiveness of SANE programs. To address these research and practice needs, it is important that researchers and SANE program practitioners develop strong collaborative relationships." The full summary is here. I don't know how to make the link yet--help. http://www.vawnet.org/SexualViolence/Research/VAWnetDocuments/AR_Sane.php

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by Alan on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:16:37 AM EST
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by cpinva on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:20:39 AM EST
    lora, if your so certain, want to make a small cash wager, that ms. arico is never called as a witness by the DA? since, according to all the published reports, she isn't the one who actually conducted the SANE, her comments are pretty meaningless.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:24:33 AM EST
    Thank you, sir. Oh, look, there's a URL button up there! (It's really late...)

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by JK on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:27:13 AM EST
    I have finally read the Supplemental Discovery Motion filed Thursday and have a few comments. The notion that this motion is just defense counsel "churning" for fees is ridiculous. There are several important strategic purposes served by the motion. First, this motion is designed to provide additional support to the previously filed motion to compel. Apparently, Nifong has withheld quite a bit of discovery, and it appears that at least one of his tactics in doing so has been to avoid having many of the investigative details reduced to writing. Nifong's purpose in doing this is multifold - to keep the defense in the dark as long as possible and to maintain maximum flexibility in presenting his case. The purpose of the defense is equally obvious - to find out as many of the details about the investigative process as possible, to peg down Nifong's position, to develop a full record of the inconsistencies between the AV's multiple versions of the events, and to develop a full record of the inconsistencies between the medical data and the AV's versions of events. Thus, the fundamental purpose of this motion is to force Nifong to hand over any other versions of the medical reports (and other reports) that have not been provided and to force Nifong to memorialize in writing certain aspects of the investigation that have not been described in the reports. Another purpose of the motion is to educate the judge about (a) inconsistencies in the various stories of the AV, (b) the inconsistencies between Nifong's public statements and what the evidence shows, and (c) Nifong's ethical violations. Based on the timeline provided, Nifong and/or Himan either lied in court documents or (more likely) failed to memorialize in writing certain aspects of the investigation and the interactions with medical personnel. The most important part of this motion is the prayer for relief, which seeks a very detailed order requiring all law enforcement officers and anyone else involved in the investigation to reduce all their activities to writing and to certify that all activities have been reported in writing. If the court substantially grants this relief, it strongly limits Nifong's ability to present any new details, variations, or explanations of discrepancies later on at trial. If I were a criminal defendant, and my liberty were at stake, I would want this motion filed.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:25:57 AM EST
    SLOphoto posted:
    To those who are better informed:
    I have not flung any sh*t on this post, nor have I ever made a personal attack on anyone else who has ever posted here. The poster named "blakely" has me confused with someone else.
    That's a lie, SLOphoto. Posted by SLOphoto May 31, 2006 04:46 PM
    IMHO is not someone to be trifled with on these postings. She will pounce with all the predatory skill and ken of a saber tooth tiger if she catches the scent of a desirable prey. And I have watched a respectable number of would-be adversaries here on this site learn that lesson the hard way.
    You have yet to meet your match on this site, we both know it, and we both know why. You were not one of those people in Isla Vista who developed her intellect by humbly contemplating the jewel in the heart of the lotus flower. You lived on Del Playa.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:27:29 AM EST
    Talk Left, In case you don't know what provoked blakely, here are insults directed at just me, in just that one thread: Sundance: ******** I'm wondering why, in IMHO's and Blakely's world, every one is lying, spinning, misrepresenting, or misinterpreting (the lax players, the defense lawyers, the officer on the scene, the SANE nurse IT, the camera phone, the ATM camera, the THs, probably Seligmann's cab driver, etc.) except for Kimmy, Precious, Brian, Himan, and Nifong, even though those (excepting Himan) are the ones whose stories have been inconsistent. Not at all. Note that word-spinner IMHO even managed to make that seem derogatory. Newport: ******* And, IMHO, I now believe the earlier poster that thought Blakely is your sock puppet. Wouldn't it be something if IMHO really was Nifong? Is that even possible? We know he hasn't responded to any of the 30 or so motions that keep getting tossed his way. Could it be he was too busy posting as IMHO on TL? IMHO you are really out of your element here. It's not a matter of anyone fighting anything, it's a matter of a medical center following procedures to see that it's patients rights are protected and that it is complying with the applicable law. Those things require legal review and take time. Imho, you are really full of it. That was not the complete context of my statement. I said cases of oral rape with a noncompliant victim who is fighting back would be exceedingly rare if not nonexistent. If you would state the relevance of IMHO's post re Norm Early someone might respond to it. I'm sure IMHO could explain how this should not be trusted either. Those racist, but techno clever, boys could have all gotten together before the party and synchronized their watches with the doctored cell phone What about Himan's lies, IMHO? How long can you ignore those? You are the great corrector of all manor of typo's and general piddle-squat, why not show your real skills and address the Himan LIES? Step up. Really. It seems to me that this goes to the very heart of the case. What would be much ado about something? Maybe IMHO's Coleman discussion, or maybe correction of typo's in a motion? Kinda like you carrying on over typo's and whether Coleman lied and whether Kim's assistance was rendered in the bathroom or whether she provided such assistance from another room, or the lawn, or the car, or another planet Sorry, IMHO, but the above makes no sense. Try again. Hey, IMHO, I want some of what you are smokin. wumhenry: ********* that was a test of candor, IMHO, and you flunked whatisthat: ********** This is an example of IMHO's world: For Liefong you say "...I will try to see if there is an explanation." For the defense, ANYTHING they say or write is a lie, incorrect, a loser, etc. IMHO, you are a fraud. I'll bet if the circumstances were different and most of this board were in favor of an actual AV (not FA as in this case), that you would be arguing the defense side. Again, one who just like to argue and likes the attention...which I will stop putting on you now. Darn, I got sucked in again. I used to lump Lora and IMHO together as the same...unreasonable and close-minded, but I must say, after Lora's posts last night, I view her differently. IMHO, on the other hand, why do you continue with this nonsense? It seems you could be a smart person who could actually contribute Oh crap, I just got sucked into responding to something ridiculous that IMHO posted. Now I see how it happens. value to this board...this is a "law board" right? Yet...you lose all credibility with your one-sided antics. I really thought you could add value to this discussion and was interested in your view. I was wrong. I'm sorry for setting the bar too high for you to be able to contribute. Bob in Pacifica: *************** What I have done for the last few days is comment on IMHO's intellectually dishonest games here. I don't think that many here besides a couple of fans (or alter egos) think that she's a particularly honest seeker of truth. And IMHO hasn't responded to what I wrote, as she hasn't responded to others here, when her bogus act is exposed. In an honest discussion, you discuss. If IMHO can waste two or three days berating Coleman for mentioning the investigators' failure to use fillers, when her own definition of what constitutes a filler even doesn't jibe with real-world standards, and all her marginal arguments had already been answered a long time ago by TL, then she must be able to find the time to answer a few questions. That's not her game, though. And it is a game. Your game is to bring up that Sharon mentioned the AV's name. You're due to bring it up again. Newport, IMHO, in her quest for intellectual dishonesty among the lawyers and the media, cannot recognize dishonesty in the police, the DA or herself. Alan: **** imho then introjected (a nicer word than fabricated) a previously unmentioned 'qualified doctor or nurse' to advise Dr Nifong on the medical content of the examination. Which position is yours? Or shall we have another imhological argument about the meaning of 'presence'? I don't see the benefit to filling an already speculative thread with a mountain of introjected imhology. Alan's speech on respect is a good closer: Posted by Alan June 16, 2006 11:36 PM Posted by blakely
    Then I suggest you and your friends raise the level of discourse by stopping the personal attacks on me and imho. But, of course, you won't do that. For some reason you and others think you have a God given right to sh*t flinging.
    You are not comparing like with like. No-one has said anything to or about you and imho that begins to approach the degree of spite you have used. TalkLeft has set standards of discourse for this board.Imputing child sexual assault does not meet them. You should apologise, both to those you abused and to our host who considers this her living room, if you want anyone's respect. ****************** If anyone plans to scroll through that thread hoping to find I responded with insults of the same tenor or anywhere near the same volume, they'll be sadly disappointed. I think they will be surprised at the level of civility I maintained. btw, I'm not complaining about the insults. I find it amusing that these commenters are so bent on discrediting me. Why are they so threatened by what I have to say?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:36:19 AM EST
    That was a good post, jk. What do you think of the part about Nifong's statements concerning his opinion on the use of condoms? I didn't get their point.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:45:16 AM EST
    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. I mean, if I were one of those attorneys, I wouldn't really want to try a case against me either. Mike Nifong

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by Alan on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:17:17 AM EST
    Which of the supposed insults do you say is equivalent to an imputation of child sexual assault, imho? I am looking for a list of equivalent insults, not equivocation.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:32:46 AM EST
    Lora said:
    Theresa Arico, sexual assault nurse examiner and coordinator of Duke Hospital program (Herald-sun via NCCU Eagles fan page):
    "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told."
    Do you really think that the head of the SANE program would say that if there wasn't back-up for it? I don't.
    As has been explained before, "consistent with" is artful wording invented by feminists to make rape prosecutions easier by appearing to say more than it does. In fact since rape need not cause physical injury the results of a medical examination will almost always be "consistent with rape".

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:49:41 AM EST
    Lora, inmyhumbleopinion (6/16 5:37 pm) said:
    I think what we are seeing here is the fact that no signs, no injury and no symptoms are considered to be consistent with being raped and sexually assaulted vaginally and anally.
    Her behavior was "consistent with a traumatic experience." She claimed to be experiencing pain in her v@ginal area and the nurse noted "diffuse edema of the v@ginal walls," but neither of these injuries or symptoms need be present. Same with lack of an@l injuries, signs, or symptoms.
    This makes the same point as my post above.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:54:14 AM EST
    Alan, You wrote to Blakely:
    TalkLeft has set standards of discourse for this board. Imputing child sexual assault does not meet them.
    Imputing false accusations of rape does, however meet the standard. It isn't necessary for the level of discourse to be allowed to descend that low, but Talkleft allowed it to, and it is not surprising that there are people who respond to that low standard in kind. It's what makes it a hot case. I would note that the same people who like to use the term FA to refer to the AV have also averred that falsely accusing someone of rape is a worse crime than rape itself. We can only imagine how serious the crime of falsely accusing a person of falsely accusing a person of rape might therefore be, but that's the sort of living room being run here. You wrote to Blakely: You should apologise, both to those you abused and to our host who considers this her living room, if you want anyone's respect. TL, I don't know whether you caught my post earlier in the week regarding your worries about the cost of bandwidth. Rather than donate to a cause I don't believe in, I would prefer to make my donation by authorizing you to delete all my prior posts as you have Blakelys, and Orinoco's before he reinvented himself. I have no interest in taking money out of your pocket for the pleasure of publishing my ideas on your vanity thread. If you want me to curse someone out in order to effect their removal, I'll be happy to, but I'd prefer to leave on better terms, as I honestly did not understand that this wasn't a for-profit site generating income for you. Nobody will object to my posts being removed, as they were for the most part against the flow of traffic. Thank you for your attention to this.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by Alan on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:55:53 AM EST
    PB wrote:
    Imputing false accusations of rape does, however meet the standard. It isn't necessary for the level of discourse to be allowed to descend that low, but Talkleft allowed it to, and it is not surprising that there are people who respond to that low standard in kind. It's what makes it a hot case.
    That's a ridiculous rhetorical stretch by which questioning the AV's story would be congruent to imputing child sexual assault to particular individuals on this board. Equally it would make judgements by the set of posters who declare false accusation worse than the crime itself (a much smaller number than those who question the AV's story) determinative of this issue. It is just flat out weird that you call for the judgement of that group, with whom you violently disagree, determinative on this issue but no other. Purely for the sake of clarity, I'll note that ascriibng a characteristic to a proposition is not the same as ascribing that characteristic to a proponent.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:58:49 AM EST
    Alan, You wrote,
    That's a ridiculous rhetorical stretch by which questioning the AV's story would be congruent to imputing child sexual assault to particular individuals on this board.
    Calling the AV a "False Accuser" is not analogous to "questioning the AV's story." Why not? Because there is no "question" in it. It is a conclusion, not a question. You wrote:
    Equally it would make judgements by the set of posters who declare false accusation worse than the crime itself (a much smaller number than those who question the AV's story) determinative of this issue.
    Determinative of what issue? The kind of living room Talkleft keeps? You wrote:
    It is just flat out weird that you call for the judgement of that group, with whom you violently disagree, determinative on this issue but no other.
    If I were a juror I would be all concerned about who is guilty and who is not in this case. My preferred concern now is that the accuser get a fair trial. The fix is in, the press core is irresponsibly behind it, the madding crowd is supporting their team, and the true question, which begins with whether three particular boys were ever alone in the bathroom with the woman now accusing them, hasn't come close to being answered.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:12:58 AM EST
    Alan, Just one other thing, You wrote that I "violently disagree" with the group of posters who suggest that it is worse to be falsely accused of rape than to be raped. I have not expressed an opinion of my own on that issue. I consider it a Sophie's Choice. I was simply pointing out that those who toss the term "FA" around without much caution while at the same time expressing the opinion that false accusations are heinous crimes run the risk of self-humiliating. Will they feel bad about that when the day is done? My guess is no. They're not the types.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by Alan on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:56:19 AM EST
    PB wrote:
    My preferred concern now is that the accuser get a fair trial.
    The accuser is not on trial. Three others are on trial as the result of the accusation. That's not a fine rhetorical point.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by ding7777 on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:58:10 AM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion If you responded to this before, I didn't see it. re Coleman's letter
    What do you think he should have said?
    how about** [Having at least 6 lineups] strongly suggests the purpose of the identification process was to give the alleged victim [mutilple] opportunit[ies] to pick three members of the lacrosse team who [attended the party and] could be charged. Any three students [who attended the party] would do; there could be no wrong choice.
    ** modified from previous thread for clarity

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:18:20 AM EST
    I think the risk of those who've called the AV a liar being proved wrong is negligible. Of course the difference is even if the various accusations that have been made in the media etc. are true and she's lying the media etc. have no power to send her to jail. While her potentially false accusations had the potential to send these boys to prison. In the first few weeks of this case supporters of the AV spent a lot of time slandering the whole team. Remember all the BS about white privilege/elitists etc? They were baying for blood. So it's a bit rich for those who engaged in that behaviour to now get all self-righteous and say "how dare we impugn the reputation of the AV". Will her supporters feel bad when these allegations are proven to be false? My guess is no. They are not the types.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:22:03 AM EST
    Imputing false accusations of rape does, however meet the standard. It isn't necessary for the level of discourse to be allowed to descend that low, but Talkleft allowed it to, and it is not surprising that there are people who respond to that low standard in kind. It's what makes it a hot case. I would note that the same people who like to use the term FA to refer to the AV have also averred that falsely accusing someone of rape is a worse crime than rape itself. We can only imagine how serious the crime of falsely accusing a person of falsely accusing a person of rape might therefore be, but that's the sort of living room being run here. You wrote to Blakely: You should apologise, both to those you abused and to our host who considers this her living room, if you want anyone's respect. TL, I don't know whether you caught my post earlier in the week regarding your worries about the cost of bandwidth. Rather than donate to a cause I don't believe in, I would prefer to make my donation by authorizing you to delete all my prior posts as you have Blakelys, and Orinoco's before he reinvented himself. I have no interest in taking money out of your pocket for the pleasure of publishing my ideas on your vanity thread. If you want me to curse someone out in order to effect their removal, I'll be happy to, but I'd prefer to leave on better terms, as I honestly did not understand that this wasn't a for-profit site generating income for you. Nobody will object to my posts being removed, as they were for the most part against the flow of traffic. Thank you for your attention to this.
    Inputing false accusations of gang-rape at this point, is merely stating facts. Once again, there could have been A rape, as in singular, but even that is highly unlikely. Since the FA has accused 3 boys of gang-rape, she is, by definition a false accuser unless you are maintaining the police records lie, and that she never accused anyone of gang-rape The lack of DNA is probative here and represents physical proof - or rather it's total absence on any part of her body or clothing - represents the proof that no gang-rape occured. I bet you can't find a single forensic DNA technologist in the world who thinks that it is possible for a gang rape involving or*l, an*l and vag*nal penetration to have happened without leaving some trace on or in her body, esp. if there was a struggle as the FA has claimed. Now I don't know about you, but I prefer to deal with physical evidence in this case as, you know, people can lie either deliberately or mistakenly. It takes a rather scary form of intellectual sophistry to try to place testimony on the same evidential plane as physical evidence. And since the physical evidence doesn't support your side -not even the nail- you and IMHO prefer to ignore it, debating on marginal points in the defense motions and, increasingly, as more and more people of power and intellect come to the conclusion that something stinks in Nifong's Durham you and she throw more and more intellectual and moral insults out from the safety of your keyboard. Quite frankly whether you posted 300 times or 3000 times to this debate, you've contributed little or nothing to it. I prefer your presence only in comparison to Blakely, as , at least, you can sometimes get a few posts off without insulting anyone. Keep up the "good work".

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:01:35 AM EST
    ding7777, I did miss it last night, thanks for bringing it over to this thread. ding7777's proposed correction of Coleman's letter:
    [Having at least 6 lineups] strongly suggests the purpose of the identification process was to give the alleged victim [mutilple] opportunit[ies] to pick three members of the lacrosse team who [attended the party and] could be charged. Any three students [who attended the party] would do; there could be no wrong choice.
    I just added one sentence:
    [Having at least 6 lineups] strongly suggests the purpose of the identification process was to give the alleged victim [mutilple] opportunit[ies] to pick three members of the lacrosse team who [attended the party and] could be charged. Any three students [who attended the party] would do; there could be no wrong choice [if she was able to successfully avoid the wrong choices we have included, assuming all three captains did not lie and/or are not mistaken about every one of the players they listed as not being in attendance and assuming Mr. Charles Sherwood was not just blowing smoke up the reporter's @ss].
    or:
    [Having at least 6 lineups] strongly suggests the purpose of the identification process was to give the alleged victim [mutilple] opportunit[ies] to pick three members of the lacrosse team who [attended the party and] could be charged. Any three students [who attended the party] would do; there could be no wrong choice [because we removed the photos of the five players we have reason to believe we not in attendance.]
    or:
    This strongly suggests that the purpose of the identification process was to give the alleged victim an opportunity to pick three members of the lacrosse team who could be charged. [If all of the players photographed were, in fact, at the party,] any three students would do; there could be no wrong choice, [though that scenario would rely on all three captains and Mr. Charles Sherwood being untruthful and/or mistaken when speaking to the police, and a reporter, respectively.]
    Here's a correction closer to Coleman's real letter:
    This strongly suggests that the purpose of the identification process was to give the alleged victim an opportunity to pick three members of the lacrosse team who could be charged. Almost any three students would do; from what the police were told the odds were against her making a wrong choice.
    How about this:
    Having had at least 6 lineups previous to the powerpoint presentation, strongly suggests the purpose of this identification process was not to give the alleged victim an opportunity to indentify her attackers, we'd all ready done that, but an opportunity to indentify potential witnesses to the crimes being investigated, therefore none of line up guidelines would apply.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by weezie on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:01:39 AM EST
    Happy trails blakester! Watch out for an errant pot upside your angry head.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:02:32 AM EST
    Alan, You wrote:
    The accuser is not on trial. Three others are on trial as the result of the accusation. That's not a fine rhetorical point.
    Nobody's on trial. Some people think there won't be a trial until January, but there are a lot of people predicting and working feverishly to assure there won't be a trial at all. They're looking to put the fix in. The world is watching to find out how Americans do business. A trial is the answer to be proud of. banco55, You wrote:
    Will her supporters feel bad when these allegations are proven to be false? My guess is no. They are not the types.
    Well, I can't speak for the New Black Panther Party, but as someone who has never claimed that the players raped the accuser, I personally don't feel I'll have much to apologize for when they are found not guilty. My interest is in having everyone have a fair trial. CIB you wrote:
    It takes a rather scary form of intellectual sophistry to try to place testimony on the same evidential plane as physical evidence.
    It takes a rather scary form of intellectual sophistry to try to place hearsay above evidence... This was one of Gottholt Lessing's points when, reflecting upon Christianity. He wrote (I'll paraphrase)...
    It is one thing to witness a miracle. It is quite another to hear about it second-hand. That nobody should deny.
    You are not a finder of fact... You are a reader of the newspaper. Rant all you want about what's true and what isn't among the barrage of statements from the defense attorneys and the reporters... A trial is the right place to determine where the physical evidence crosses paths with the witness statements.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:16:17 AM EST
    If I was a taxpayer in Durham I certainly wouldn't want this case to go to trial. How much money is going to be pissed away on something that should never have got this far in the first place?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by spartan on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:40:23 AM EST
    To change the subject and get back to Lora's comment (12:19). Did Ms. Arico actually review the accuser's SANE report or was she just speaking generally about what she thought the injuries were and the likelihood that they would be consistent with a rape. If she actually reviewed the SANE report and made those comments she made a BIG HIPAA violation. Somebody asked earlier if the request/fax for a patients records would be included in the discovery. I don't know . I just know that if a patient presents my office with a release of their records, we oblige without consulting our legal staff.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by David on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:45:47 AM EST
    PB, It's very clear that the DA is the one who does not want a trial, at least in the near future. He knows that under NC law a trial need not commence until 2007 safely past the November election. I'd contenend that the defense attys in this case wouldn't mind having a trial (if one is truly justified, given the apparent (and appalling) lack of corroborative evidence supporting the charges) before the end of summer.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by spartan on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:47:55 AM EST
    I guess what I am trying to say is that the detective may have had access to some of the accuser's medical record before the actual subpoena was issued and complied with. I could make an argument that the alleged victim herself signed a release allowing the police department access to the rape exam. Then that document may not be in the police documents but in the medical records department of the hospital.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:54:42 AM EST
    David, You wrote:
    It's very clear that the DA is the one who does not want a trial, at least in the near future. He knows that under NC law a trial need not commence until 2007 safely past the November election.
    I'm not sure in what sense this is clear. Nifong made a statement that he didn't "expect" the case to come to trial (as I recall) until January and everyone was all over him for it. How is your statement that it is "clear" any more than the usual posturing people practice on this board?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:01:34 AM EST
    Blanco, You wrote:
    If I was a taxpayer in Durham I certainly wouldn't want this case to go to trial. How much money is going to be pissed away on something that should never have got this far in the first place?
    A lot of the money went for dna tests, which we are told would not have been necessary had the players cooperated. Beyond that has it been all that expensive? The police promised an aggressive investigation, but how much have they actually done beyond a few lineups and a couple of searches. As for the players' money, they can spend that however they please, as far as I'm concerned. College, beer, strippers, lawyers, bail... All these are voluntary expenditures that I don't consider my business.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:03:09 AM EST
    PB wrote:
    A trial is the right place to determine where the physical evidence crosses paths with the witness statements.
    I respectfully disgree with that generalization. I think that a criminal trial is the right place to determine the guilt or innocence of a defendant facing credible allegations. It is the duty of the DA to assure that any charges brought have merit. It is his or her call. Ideally, this means allegations are investigated by police and evidence of the type expected in a particular case is obtained and evaluated before a grand jury is approached. It is not a perfect system (like that needs to be said). Personally, my eyes have been opened to the fact that a prosecutor's dragnet can be irresponsible and indiscriminate to the degree that this one has been. As noble as the excuse of "letting the accuser have her day in court" may sound, the fact is that the "case" is evidentially bankrupt, void of the kind of substantiation we expect in 2006. It seems to me that every other week I hear of a man being released from prison after DNA testing showed no match to the evidence in the rape he supposedly committed. These men's rape convictions, I am assuming, are among the 70-80% that were achieved without DNA of the defendant being present. A prosecutor does need to get convictions. That's the job. I would expect him or her to have a certain success rate, one reflective of the careful evaluation of which cases to bring to trial, the responsible synthesis of available evidence, and the skillful, respectful presentation of said evidence in court. I expect no theatrics from a DA. I expect, and if I lived in Durham county I would demand, intellectual honesty and a demeanor appropriate to the influence with which he has been entrusted.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:19:13 AM EST
    I wrote:
    I respectfully disgree with that generalization.
    Heh. Obviously, I meant disagree.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:20:55 AM EST
    PB wrote:
    My preferred concern now is that the accuser get a fair trial.
    This has been a recurring theme of a handful of posters here, as well as the dwindling number of pro-Nifong talking heads. It represents a sentiment that turns the American system of justice on its head. Unlike most other governments at the time the Bill of Rights was written, the Constitution seeks to provide guarantees that ensure the defendant, not the accuser, will have the right to a "fair trial." Our whole system of justice is set up to ensure that those charged with crimes--not those accuse them--receive every benefit of the doubt. After all, the accuser has the power of the state on his or her side. Moreover, the protections in the Bill of Rights are supposed to ensure that the government follows the rules in bringing criminal charges. But in this case, the prosecutor has violated normal procedures left and right. The system of justice seemingly valued by a few on this board reminds me of a place like Egpyt or Russia, where, for all practical purposes, those who are accused of crimes must prove their innocence, rather than the state having to prove their guilt.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:21:38 AM EST
    banco55 posted:
    Will her supporters feel bad when these allegations are proven to be false?
    My guess is no. They are not the types.
    banco55, Could you give us your definition of an AV supporter, and/or gives us some examples of AV supporters that post here?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:31:42 AM EST
    A lot of the money went for dna tests, which we are told would not have been necessary had the players cooperated. Beyond that has it been all that expensive? The police promised an aggressive investigation, but how much have they actually done beyond a few lineups and a couple of searches. As for the players' money, they can spend that however they please, as far as I'm concerned. College, beer, strippers, lawyers, bail... All these are voluntary expenditures that I don't consider my business.
    If it goes to trial it will be expensive. Obviously a lot of man hours will be put into this case by the judge, prosecutors etc. that could have been put into cases where the defendant actually has a case to answer. As for the players costs I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Durham ends up paying for them after a civil suit from the players.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:34:46 AM EST
    IMHO, Off the top of my head: Jessie Jackson and some of the Duke professors are/were good examples of AV supporters. As for AV supporters on this board: you are currently the closest thing we've got to one (as you well know).

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:35:31 AM EST
    banco55:
    As for the players costs I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Durham ends up paying for them after a civil suit from the players
    I would.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:37:45 AM EST
    It takes a rather scary form of intellectual sophistry to try to place hearsay above evidence... This was one of Gottholt Lessing's points when, reflecting upon Christianity. He wrote (I'll paraphrase)...
    My, my, you keep on spinning along. The DNA results are public record, not "hearsay", and until you can deal with them it's rather obvious your side has no arguments. I think I'll take a page out of Bob's book and ask you to show me the evidence that a gangrape ocurred here. Not that I expect you will, you really have no leg to stand on in terms of facts on the physical level, so you are reduced to sophistry, word-play, and hope for secret evidence. Rather pathetic.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:46:17 AM EST
    PB wrote:
    A lot of the money went for dna tests, which we are told would not have been necessary had the players cooperated.
    May I ask by whom we are told this? And just what sort of "cooperation" by the players would have made DNA testing of all the team unnecessary, given how this case presented itself? How about false confessions by three players, to take it on the chin for the team, Duke University, and the City of Durham? The FACT is that even under this admittedly unlikely circumstance, their DNA would still be absent from the accuser's person. I submit that the DA would then be even more obligated to consider that the allegations are unfounded.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:53:53 AM EST
    PB wrote:
    Beyond that has it been all that expensive?
    Yes, expensive enough that other cases in the queue to have evidence tested prior to this one have been delayed substantially. I submit that the City of Durham does not have infinite resources. I also submit that it is not very efficient.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:09:27 AM EST
    cib posted:
    Inputing false accusations of gang-rape at this point, is merely stating facts. Once again, there could have been A rape, as in singular, but even that is highly unlikely. Since the FA has accused 3 boys of gang-rape, she is, by definition a false accuser unless you are maintaining the police records lie, and that she never accused anyone of gang-rape The lack of DNA is probative here and represents physical proof - or rather it's total absence on any part of her body or clothing - represents the proof that no gang-rape occured.
    Why don't you bring this proof to the attention of the authorities? It doesn't take proof of guilt to have someone charged and indicted and you have enough proof for a conviction! If one of the players goes on trial, for say, a singular rape of the FA, the convicted "false accuser of gang rape" can tell her story from the stand while cooties she got in jail jump out of her hair onto her orange jump suit. You should not withold your expert testimony that can prove "no gang-rape occured." Do not remain silent. Please come forward!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:12:10 AM EST
    banco55 posted: Off the top of my head: Jessie Jackson and some of the Duke professors are/were good examples of AV supporters. As for AV supporters on this board: you are currently the closest thing we've got to one (as you well know). Can you give us some examples of my support for the accuser?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:14:43 AM EST
    PB wrote:
    As for the players' money, they can spend that however they please, as far as I'm concerned.
    As for the players' money, I agree with you. However, I believe (but cannot prove) that none of these young men themselves had $400,000 to post bail. Obviously, their families were able to help them post bail, but we should not assume that all the accused parties have equal resources. Nor is it fair to assume that putting up such a sum of money does not constitute a considerable, even undue, burden upon these defendants. What I have heard during one hearing leads me to believe that this may be the case. They have lost credit for at least one semester at Duke; I doubt they'll get a refund. It is possible that these players have siblings with tuitions and that the loss, even if temporary, of $400,000 has tremendous ramifications for a great number of people.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:18:20 AM EST
    Why don't you bring this proof to the attention of the authorities? It doesn't take proof of guilt to have someone charged and indicted and you have enough proof for a conviction!
    We shall see after the trial- assuming this sorry excuse of a case gets that far- whether the FA is sued in civil court, committed, or charged with a crime. I hope you are not claiming it is NiFong's self-interest to charge her at this time? In any case, the evidence -no DNA- says what it says, and no amount of snark on your account is going to change it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:47:10 AM EST
    It is expected that this case will cost the defendants over three million dollars. I could give a heck about what it costs the city of Durham. In fact, I hope they need to have a special tax assessment prior to the November election.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#47)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:50:18 AM EST
    IMHO wrote: banco55, Could you give us your definition of an AV supporter, and/or gives us some examples of AV supporters that post here? It's like that definition of pornography. You know it when you see it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:56:00 AM EST
    Beyond that has it been all that expensive?
    Apparently, it has been so expensive that the City of Durham has delayed getting DNA analysis performed from crime scene evidence where five men were shot, execution-style, in November 2005 and four died.
    When he learned in April that testing on DNA samples from 46 lacrosse players were rushed and completed in less than three weeks, Harris said he and the other parents became incensed. DNA collected from the bloody townhouse the previous November was still sitting at the lab in Raleigh, waiting its turn.
    Think Nifong pushed this case to the front of the line because of the political capital it would bring him? No, he was looking for what Tom Wolfe called "The Great White Defendant."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:56:03 AM EST
    IMHO wrote: banco55, Could you give us your definition of an AV supporter, and/or gives us some examples of AV supporters that post here?
    Durgha. Never, to my knowledge was open to the possibility the FA could be lying.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:01:34 AM EST
    Posted by inmyhumbleopinion June 17, 2006 02:25 AM
    SLOphoto posted:
    To those who are better informed: I have not flung any sh*t on this post, nor have I ever made a personal attack on anyone else who has ever posted here. The poster named "blakely" has me confused with someone else.
    That's a lie, SLOphoto. Posted by SLOphoto May 31, 2006 04:46 PM
    IMHO is not someone to be trifled with on these postings. She will pounce with all the predatory skill and ken of a saber tooth tiger if she catches the scent of a desirable prey. And I have watched a respectable number of would-be adversaries here on this site learn that lesson the hard way. You have yet to meet your match on this site, we both know it, and we both know why. You were not one of those people in Isla Vista who developed her intellect by humbly contemplating the jewel in the heart of the lotus flower. You lived on Del Playa.
    That is not a lie, IMHO. It's true. And it was a tribute to you, not a personal attack. "Surely, IMHO, you are not unaware of your persona on this board?"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#51)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:02:09 AM EST
    cib posted:
    IMHO wrote: banco55, Could you give us your definition of an AV supporter, and/or gives us some examples of AV supporters that post here?
    Durgha. Never, to my knowledge was open to the possibility the FA could be lying.
    Does that mean I do not fit your definition of an AV supporter? If so, thank you.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:15:19 AM EST
    spartan you said:
    I could make an argument that the alleged victim herself signed a release allowing the police department access to the rape exam.
    I will repeat what I said in an earlier post, not directed to you: If the AV had signed a release of her records, the SANE nurse would not have said to the police that she couldn't release any info due to the HIPAA laws. The statement was made after the AV was discharged form DMC, so if there were a release, she would already know, and it would not have required a subpoena.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:16:07 AM EST
    PB is still talking about the lack of cooperation by the lacrosse team as somehow bringing this terrible thing on all of them. I've asked several times before what specific cooperation could the teammates have offered that would have changed the course of the police and DA's actions. Only if a rape had occurred, and if other players knew and were concealing information on that rape, could someone cooperating with the DA have made any difference. The evidence is strong that no such rape occurred, that any cooperation with the police by the players was not rewarded or even believed by them, and that from very early in this case it was the authorities intention to bring charges against three players and lack of evidence did not deter them. It's clear that since early in the case Himan and Nifong have hidden exculpatory information found in their investigation and refused to look at exculpatory information offered by the defense. Both men have made statements about evidence that are at the very least misleading. Even Nifong's talk about the blue wall of silence was a lie, since he refused whatever cooperation the players lawyers offered. His continued failure to comment on discovery issues and other relevant findings since his primary victory is pretty telling as to his trial strategy: Let it hang out there until his November victory is assured, and then let it fall apart and walk away. Nifong seems to be insulated from most avenues of legal attack, so it's unlikely at this stage that he will get sued or go to jail for his misbehavior. When does he qualify for a pension in North Carolina? Maybe his next term will put him over the top. In the meantime, unless anyone actually has anything specific that the players could have done to cooperate with the DA, without presumption that a crime had been witnessed, please tell us or let that that blue wall of silence be retired along with they may have used condoms and the other pre-election gabbling from Nifong's lips.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:26:17 AM EST
    Bob, you said, reagarding the definition of AV supporters:
    It's like that definition of pornography. You know it when you see it.
    Exellent. And thanks for the past support vis a vis Durga and me. I don't see Durga as "stalking" me, but I have decided that Durga is too vexatious to my spirit for me to attempt any sort of dialogue.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:40:04 AM EST
    PB wrote: Nobody's on trial. Some people think there won't be a trial until January, but there are a lot of people predicting and working feverishly to assure there won't be a trial at all. They're looking to put the fix in. The world is watching to find out how Americans do business. A trial is the answer to be proud of. First, most of the world isn't particularly interested in this trial. The OJ Simpson trial, where a movie star and celebrity was on trial for murder in Los Angeles? Yes, that caught the world's attention. I don't think that there's all that much buzz around the world about this case. As far as what the world sees in American Justice, I would guess that they more likely notice how our Bill of Rights has been eroded over the last five years. How laws regarding illegal searches are blithely tossed aside, how the right to being charged and given a trial have been abridged, and how our nation's word regarding international treaties means nothing. Most of the rest of the world could give a damn about this little trial in a backwater town. +++ On PB's point of people "put[ting] the fix in" so there won't be a trial, I'll try once again to do what many others here have tried to explain. There has to be a threshold of reasonableness to bring this to trial. The only evidence we have that a gang rape occurred is one of the AV's several versions of the events of the evening. The physical evidence points against a rape having occurred. There is no eyewitness corroboration of a rape having occurred. There is plenty of motive for the AV to have lied about a rape having occurred. Even the presentation to the Grand Jury was flawed and the identification evidence may in fact be illegal. There is no logical basis to proceed with a trial. The AV, like every citizen, has a right to justice. But no citizen has the right to have a trial merely because he or she makes an unsubstantiated claim against someone else. If a neighbor claims that you stole his lawn ornament, should the police arrest you and the DA indict you without any evidence? If a store owner claims you shoplifted, without evidence that you had, should he be able to have you indicted for theft? Perhaps if PB were arrested for a crime she hadn't committed and had to go through the process she'd understand how her standard of justice would be better suited for a Kafka story than the U.S.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:51:32 AM EST
    Bob, good post, but I want a stronger statement than this:
    The physical evidence points against a rape having occurred.
    To something more like "The physical evidence bears no relation to the specific rape the AV said occurred in this case." It isn't, purely, that "a" rape could not have occurred. It is that THE rape that the AV charged (I keep hearing Regis in my mind when I read the AV's different recollections: "Is that your FINAL ANSWER?"), with the three named defendants, could not have occurred if the representations in the defense motions are borne out by the actual reports from the hospital from that night. And we have not even reached the issue of whether or not any of the three charged for THIS rape are "more likely than not" to have been the perpetrators.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#57)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:54:01 AM EST
    SLOphoto posted:
    That is not a lie, IMHO. It's true. And it was a tribute to you, not a personal attack. "Surely, IMHO, you are not unaware of your persona on this board?"
    Oh, I am sorry, though I didn't understand some of it, I apparently did mistake the tone. Reading a commenter's tone on these blogs is a problem that can lead to silly misunderstandings such as this one. Now that I have the tone right I can see how being compared to a predatory saber tooth tiger pouncing in its prey is a compliment, but could you explain the laudatory aspects of this part of your tribute? From SLOphoto's tribute to imho:
    we both know it, and we both know why. You were not one of those people in Isla Vista who developed her intellect by humbly contemplating the jewel in the heart of the lotus flower. You lived on Del Playa.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:59:53 AM EST
    I also find the unstated premise that it's okay to indict these people because they are rich and can afford it to be reprehensible. As if spending beer money on lawyers is some kind of choice to be made. There are a lot more poor people indicted for things they haven't done. If one is bad, so is the other. And if the rich can be falsely indicted without question, then it is way more likely that poor people will be. Not a very good way to go about justice.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#59)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:00:13 AM EST
    cib posted:
    In any case, the evidence -no DNA- says what it says, and no amount of snark on your account is going to change it.
    It does not say what you said it says. You have not proven this to be true:
    cib posted:
    Inputing false accusations of gang-rape at this point, is merely stating facts.
    Because even if someone can find a qualified expert to make your claim on the stand in a court of law, you can't guarantee a jury will agree:
    cib posted:
    The lack of DNA is probative here and represents physical proof - or rather it's total absence on any part of her body or clothing - represents the proof that no gang-rape occured.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#60)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:16:57 AM EST
    The pathetic reduction of IMHO's logic, here: Because even if someone can find a qualified expert to make your claim on the stand in a court of law, you can't guarantee a jury will agree I am reminded of the history of all-white southern juries acquitting people who bombed black churches and killed innocent children. That this woman claims she was gang raped, claims they did not use condoms, and yet there is no DNA from any of them in her or on her should have been enough to have this case tossed out. Sure, a jury could overrule expert testimony. Maybe Seligmann was also in two places at once. IMHO's comments seem to say: I don't have a convincing argument against this. Maybe a jury that doesn't understand DNA will convict them anyway. So the Seeker Of Truth's best defense is now that a jury will overlook evidence and convict on their prejudices. Pretty pathetic.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#61)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:19:44 AM EST
    Bob, I have to agree with you on this:
    I also find the unstated premise that it's okay to indict these people because they are rich and can afford it to be reprehensible.
    Even the unindicted lacrosse player have faced mounting legal bills in this farce. From the Washington Post:
    Parents of non-indicted players already have legal fees exceeding $12,000.
    Brian Loftus has two sons on the Duke Lacrosse team. He is also a firefighter, one of the many that responded to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11. I don't think he just happens to have an extra $24,000 sitting in a bank account somewhere. Nifong is the one who said the team members were uncooperative. Let me see. Nifong asked, "What happened?" Team members replied, "We hired a couple of exotic dancers. We drank some beer. Maybe we got a little loud. Absolutely no one touched the women. There was no sexual assault by any team member on either dancer." Repeat again and again and again. Nifong said they were uncooperative because he didn't get the response he was looking for.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#62)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:22:39 AM EST
    Sharon commented on my mildness in her 11:51 a.m. post. Your criticism is accepted. I was deliberately understated only so I could make a grander point which I don't recall. Late Saturday morning. Another pot of coffee needed.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:23:17 AM EST
    So the Seeker Of Truth's best defense is now that a jury will overlook evidence and convict on their prejudices.
    Isn't that what happened to OJ?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#64)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:26:00 AM EST
    Posted by inmyhumbleopinion at June 17, 2006 11:54 AM
    but could you explain the laudatory aspects of this part of your tribute?
    From SLOphoto's tribute to imho: we both know it, and we both know why. You were not one of those people in Isla Vista who developed her intellect by humbly contemplating the jewel in the heart of the lotus flower. You lived on Del Playa.
    The first sentence in full reads "You have yet to meet your match on this site, we both know it, and we both know why." More tribute. The second part about Isla Vista is an allegorical explanation of why the first part is true.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:26:55 AM EST
    Newport, My suggestion in the previous thread was merely that someone with a vested interest in an outcome favorable to the DA may be a poster. I have no idea who anybody here is. Although what you suggest could be true, it is an exceedingly unlikely possibility. Nonetheless, quite an entertaining thought.
    The only people I have heard say anything remotely good about Nifong are a few Durham crim defense lawyers whose judgment in the matter is not entirely unbiased. Would any defense attorney in Durham dare speak out against the sitting DA? That next plea deal might not be happening, you know what I mean?
    Do you mean to imply that Mr. Nifong is petty?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:44:50 AM EST
    Not criticism, Bob, but as one of the apparently few right coasters, I am well past my coffee fix. And my helmet sport son is in Oregon fishing, or something, with his dad so I have free rein of the computer on a Saturday. Reading imho and PB, and Lora in different ways, and D*rga, I am reminded of something I said to my . . . (can't call a 57 year old man a boyfriend, but for lack of a better term) early on when I first learned of and started following, obsessively, this case. Something along the lines of "If it turns out that the Duke lax players are as innocent as they claim, I can't wait for Nancy Grace and Wendy Murphy to 'eat crow' and admit they were wrong." He laughed at my naivete, and said that, no matter what, I will never see that. They will never admit they were wrong about the pool of suspects in this case, they will never admit they were wrong to believe, for so long, in the AV. The same, I suspect, will be true for this board. But I keep banging my head against the wall, hearing that sound reverberating in your and others' posts. There are some that, no matter what happens, will always believe in the AV, will always believe the Duke players (poor choice of words but it fits) got off because they played the system. To some, "AV" will stand for Actual Victim.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#67)
    by Lora on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:47:51 AM EST
    Madison, re: the SANE coordinator's comments, it would be a huge professional faux pas to say that she believes that the AV's injuries are consistent with the story (I'm assuming the one from the search warrant) the AV told, if there is no evidence of injuries. Her comments are more than just CYA, in my opinion. Sharon, If by the time Arico spoke, the search warrant info was common knowledge, she didn't reveal anything new. cpinva, My bets (and I've suggested a couple) are all of the "I told you so" type. Just for fun. But I don't think Arico will be called as a witness either. But that doesn't mean she hasn't spoken with the folks who examined the AV or read their reports. I can't imagine her stating what she did in public without doing that. James, Ms. Arico did say there were injuries. whatisthat, While I appreciate not being lumped with anyone else, I will say that imho's many posts provide the greatest number of quotes from and links to the sources that so many of us attempt to remember and discuss. I truly appreciate imho's effort and work to allow us all to look at the facts of the case, such as they are. And while imho's sense of humor apparently does not sit well with you all (I admit I enjoy it), when it comes to the personal attack crap that has been so prevalent lately, imho, while not running from a fight and exercising considerable restraint given the level of hostility directed toward her (him? I always thought so, lol, not that it matters), never starts it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#68)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:50:34 AM EST
    From SLOphoto's explanation of the laudatory aspects of his tribute to imho.
    The first sentence in full reads "You have yet to meet your match on this site, we both know it, and we both know why*." More tribute.
    The second part** about Isla Vista is an allegorical explanation of why the first part is true.
    The second part:
    **You were not one of those people in Isla Vista who developed her intellect by humbly contemplating the jewel in the heart of the lotus flower. You lived on Del Playa.
    SLOphoto: **Only one of us knows why and I have no clue to as the meaning of your allegory. Maybe others can appreciate what you are saying, but I am at a loss. Don't be shy, let your heart be heard.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#69)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:51:30 AM EST
    While I'm in ranting mode, and this may not be my first comment along this line: I think there is an internal inconsistency for someone to support both the AV and Nifong. He has, since the indictments were handed down, abandoned her. Every attack on her can only be countered by him, at this point. So where is he? Why has he not responded, in the same vein and forum as the defense attorneys, with a response to even one of their motions? If you care for the AV, if you care for rape victims as a class, how can you defend Nifong's actions, or lack thereof, all these weeks since he won the primary and developed the deer in the headlights attitude?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#70)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:56:58 AM EST
    Lora, I appreciate that humor is perhaps the most subjective of attributes. But
    And while imho's sense of humor apparently does not sit well with you all
    Do you chuckle when imho takes shots, albeit she says she's just joking, at a mother of an accused, at mothers of Duke lax players who are not accused? Are they, in your mind, "fair game" for nasty comments about their professions, lifestyles, or parenting practices? Along those lines, imho: So nice to see you worrying about the Evans' budget, that they are "paying" Cheshire to file motions like the last one.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#71)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:00:40 PM EST
    In re: The SANE report Even IF the report said "consistent with" rape that does not explain how Nifong could claim to have read the report before it was generated; it does not say that, had the SANE examiner been told the "final answer" story of the AV, she would have agreed that it was "consistent with" the observed and observable injuries. "Consistent with a 'no choking, no condoms, an*l and v*ginal" rape.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#72)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:17:52 PM EST
    Lora wrote: Madison, re: the SANE coordinator's comments, it would be a huge professional faux pas to say that she believes that the AV's injuries are consistent with the story (I'm assuming the one from the search warrant) the AV told, if there is no evidence of injuries. Her comments are more than just CYA, in my opinion. Lora, I respect that you consider Ms. Arico's statement to be strong. I disagree with you that the statement is strong; it is mild and only serves not to contradict whatever was asserted (Take note that we-you and I-have to agree here on a story with which the results can be "consistent"--I accept what you offered). Ms. Arico has not taken a risky stand here because she has not said anything substantive: therefore she runs no risk of engendering a professional faux-pas, as you put it. Injuries, no injuries, whatever. SANE is predisposed to making a finding consistent with rape. AND I'll bet the discovery of semen in the accuser served to (INCORRECTLY) bolster her credibility. As we know (and we do know, this is not anyone's spin) that semen belonged to none of the players tested. It matched a man whom the accuser likely never mentioned as a possible source until after the DNA results came back. Go figure.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#73)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:26:19 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    Do you chuckle when imho takes shots, albeit she says she's just joking, at a mother of an accused, at mothers of Duke lax players who are not accused? Are they, in your mind, "fair game" for nasty comments about their professions, lifestyles, or parenting practices?
    1. My there, there Honey satirical post [not directed any any specific mother]. 2. My Mrs. Evans harding working mother of two satirical post that was in direct reponse to the parenting practices of the accuser. 3. My on topic comment about Sally Fogarty's coping techniques posted in a thread introduced as: The dukesters need a new thread. What's in the news? The Washington Post explores how the players' families are coping. I can only think of three, but there could be more. Sharon, If you will concede there are far more derogatory comments and jokes about the accuser's father posted here, you can spare me looking them all up. I know you were sympathetic to him, but where was your indignation when others were brutally attacking him?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#74)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:29:57 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    Along those lines, imho:
    So nice to see you worrying about the Evans' budget, that they are "paying" Cheshire to file motions like the last one
    I take that back. jk wrote an excellent post on the motion that changed my mind about it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#75)
    by blcc on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:58:55 PM EST
    Lora, The so-called rape kit is not a neutral source, you need to keep that in mind. This is not snark, btw. I'm just honestly quite often surprised by the general lack of knowledge - in the population as a whole, not just specifically this board - about what a rape kit is designed to do. Perhaps that's because both the language and the purpose live in two different worlds, as it were, and when medical jargon gets used in the legal realm it takes on a weight that the medical community never attributed to it. One of the exam's purposes is advocacy, consequently the language is carefully chosen to avoid contradicting the patient's story. A woman could be raped, or she could have consensual intercourse - and either way the S.A.N.E. will always note that the physical findings are "consistent" with rape. The only physical finding "inconsistent" with rape is an intact h*men.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#76)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:13:09 PM EST
    jk - I agree with IMHO that: "I have finally read the Supplemental Discovery Motion filed Thursday and have a few comments" is an excellent post. Very insightful into the strategies, although they certainly weren't obvious to me.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#77)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:14:34 PM EST
    imho: I will repeat what is, to me, a distinction between the accuser's father and the accuseds' (and other Duke lax players') mothers: None of the latter group has given interviews telling what their sons supposedly told them about that night. None of them has diminished rather than enhanced the credibility of their children. I, honestly, do not remember much calumny being directed at the AV's father personally, but I do not necessarily think that means that it did not happen. In legal terms: I neither deny nor confirm that. But disbelief and/or disdain for his comments, as being probative or accurate or reliable? That is fair game because he made the decision to speak about the case. He made the choice to make statements that at times support his daughter's story, at times contradict his daughter's story, at times contradict others' stories. If there were, indeed, personal attacks on him, then that was wrong. But if there were attacks on his comments, and the credibility or veracity or accuracy thereof, then that IS fair game for challenge and incredulity. On the other hand, Evans, Finnerty and Seligman's parents (particularly their mothers: I have yet to hear you criticize their fathers) have said nothing regarding this case. Your attitude toward them and your comments about them are unwarranted. And please, in furtherance of honesty, admit that they were cheap shots. Meant as humorous asides? I don't think so.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#78)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:15:38 PM EST
    blcc posted:
    The only physical finding "inconsistent" with rape is an intact h*men
    link
    that view of the evidence. Any penetration, however slight, is sufficient to constitute the crime of rape. Section 1836, Comp. St. 1921.
    "The slightest penetration, however, of the body of the female by the sexual organ of the male is sufficient; it is not necessary that the penetration should be perfect; nor that there should be an entering of the vagina or rupturing of the hymen; the entering of the vulva or labia is sufficient." 33 Cyc., p. 1422 (II).


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#79)
    by blcc on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:16:53 PM EST
    Madison, Sorry I missed your post above. You are largely correct, but I'd like to fine tune your statement "SANE is predisposed to making a finding consistent with rape" if I may. SANE stands for Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner and she is specially trained to treat the patient, as well as record physical findings and preserve evidence in a standardized protocol. She (always a she) is a medical professional whose first and foremost duty is to the patient. Her perspective is from that of one caring for patients in the medical realm where "consistent" is not a loaded term designed to carry evidentiary weight. Pardon my insistence on this point, but I feel strongly that the medical-legal crossover leads to a lot of misunderstandings. Even the use of the term "rape kit" is weighted, carrying as it does a connotation that medical personnel have performed an exam and thereby "blessed" a legal finding. This is beyond the scope of what medical evaluation is designed to do.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#80)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:20:58 PM EST
    blcc: good post. One of the "elephants in the living room" about this or any rape case is that it is inherent in the purpose of having a SANE professional do the primary intake is to provide a sympathetic approach to each and every victim. I have no statistics to back this statement, but I would think that it is extremely rare for a SANE examiner to come right out and say, "didn't happen." That is not their role. Their role is to get the victim to open up, to feel comfortable telling horrible details and facts. A SANE examiner should, then, be able to trust the law enforcement personnel and prosecution team to make the legal determination that an actual rape occurred, not just an incident that is "consistent with" a rape. A SANE report merely crosses an early, low-set bar: could this woman have been raped?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#81)
    by blcc on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:22:06 PM EST
    IMHO, Your post is exactly what I'm talking about with regard to misunderstandings here. You are talking about rape, a crime, a legal finding. The SANE is noting her observations of a physical exam in a medical context. These concepts are orthogonal.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#82)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:25:57 PM EST
    Sharon, I think you nail the difference between the AV's father and the defendants' families. The AV's father has discussed a number of aspects of events around the case and his daughter: his conflicting version of the AV's past rapes, his knowledge of her current profession, his mention of her several psychiatric setbacks, for example. His version of events, attributed mostly to what his daughter told him, are at odds with others' stories (although as this case unfolds, whose story matches anyone else's?). The defendants' families offer nothing to the facts of the actual case. The father's comments don't add much to the facts of the case other than to further distrust the AV's ability to tell the truth. It must very hard for IMHO to be an impartial discerner of truth when she has such a rooting interest against one side.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#83)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:39:00 PM EST
    Theresa Arico said: "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told." It's also consistent with having sex with a pimp and a number of customers and her boyfriend, getting falling down drunk and scratching herself, not being gang raped, and then, when faced with being involuntarily held because of her public intoxication, inventing the rape story. Since Arico didn't have any knowledge about the DNA results, a reasonable person not constrained by the SANE guidelines would conclude that the evidence is more consistent with the latter than the former. The evidence, as timidly expressed by Arico, is also consistent with Santa Claus in that it doesn't disprove Santa's existence. I just wouldn't go into court with it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#84)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:40:36 PM EST
    By the way, it's my understanding that the AV didn't even mention the an*l rape to the SANE nurse. It must have been in one of the defense motions. Has that been verified? Seems to me to be something that she wouldn't have failed to mention.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#85)
    by blcc on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:44:13 PM EST
    Thank you Sharon, Your statement is the closest thus far
    "A SANE report merely crosses an early, low-set bar: could this woman have been raped?"
    For the record though, the report isn't even designed to do that, because there is no bar from the medical perspective. It's designed to record the patient's version of events, and then record physical findings. If the patient says she was raped, then that's what will be written down. By way of example, have you ever heard ER docs discuss some of their most notorious cases? You will never, ever hear a doctor tell a patient "No, you did not fall naked off a ladder onto that lightbulb, tell me what really happened." Sure, they may give the "hairy eyeball" but they won't "correct" the patient's account. If you were to look at the chart, it would read something like this: Patient presented in extreme distress, verbal account of a lightbulb in r*ctum from "falling from a ladder", physical exam revealed no bleeding from the an*s but diffuse swelling, x-ray exam shows intact lightbulb in sigmoid colon. Patient was anesthetized... Part of what creates the humor of the storytelling, of course, is the doc's ability to play it perfectly straight, but that's beyond the scope of this post.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#86)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:44:46 PM EST
    blcc, If I understand you correctly, then (please correct me if this is wrong) the S.A.N.E.'s physical examination of the woman carries no evidentiary weight? But because the evidence during such an exam is collected according to a standard protocol designed to better preserve it, do we then have greater confidence in the DNA results performed on said evidence? I did look up S.A.N.E. before my first post at the very top of this page and there expressed my concern about the physical exam being used at all, given the lack of controls apparent in the literature of 2004.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#87)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:44:55 PM EST
    Madison, you wrote, Newport,
    My suggestion in the previous thread was merely that someone with a vested interest in an outcome favorable to the DA may be a poster. I have no idea who anybody here is. Although what you suggest could be true, it is an exceedingly unlikely possibility. Nonetheless, quite an entertaining thought. The only people I have heard say anything remotely good about Nifong are a few Durham crim defense lawyers whose judgment in the matter is not entirely unbiased. Would any defense attorney in Durham dare speak out against the sitting DA? That next plea deal might not be happening, you know what I mean? Do you mean to imply that Mr. Nifong is petty?
    That would be putting it mildly. I have nothing but contempt for this disgraceful man that would destroy the lives of three innocent young men to advance his own pathetic political career. There should be a special place in Hell for Nifong and anyone else who participated in the lynching. Maybe someone should discuss the latest medical report evidence shown in Cheshire's latest motion. It is unbelievable the stories the FA has given. There are not 6 stories in there, more like 26. Obviously, Nifong did quite a job on the medical report to justify charging three men with the acts alleged. Come on, the Precious told the SANE nurse that, "she claimed that only two men sexually assaulted her: one of them inserted his penis into her vagina and her mouth, and the other inserted his penis into her rectum alone." Maybe someone can tell me how three men were charged based on this? Was she just so traumatized that she got some minor details wrong like the number of men who raped her? Why was Seligman indicted? Why were three men indicted? How does all this square with what the FA said at the lineup? To PB who doesn't like the fact that I call Precious a "FA." At this point she doesn't deserve the "benefit of the doubt" because there is no doubt that she is a false accuser. None.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#88)
    by blcc on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:59:41 PM EST
    Bob,
    By the way, it's my understanding that the AV didn't even mention the an*l rape to the SANE nurse. It must have been in one of the defense motions. Has that been verified? Seems to me to be something that she wouldn't have failed to mention.
    Bob, a qualified SANE would have included the area in the physical exam, and if she observed any trauma she would have followed-up on it and recorded her findings.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#89)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:03:15 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    On the other hand, Evans, Finnerty and Seligman's (particularly their mothers: I have yet to hear you criticize their fathers) have said nothing regarding this case. Your attitude toward them and your comments about them are unwarranted. And please, in furtherance of honesty, admit that they were cheap shots. Meant as humorous asides? I don't think so.
    What have I said about Finnerty and Seligman's mothers or fathers? What is my attitude toward them? My post about Mrs. Evans was a criticism of beenaround's mocking the accuser as a mother, as have you. What does the accuser's parenting have to do with this case?
    beenaround posted:
    Please tell us truthfully what you think she was doing?
    Giving people tuition in how to respect a hardworking mother of two?
    Because the players' parents have not defended their sons in the media and the accuser's father lacks the sophistication avoid that pitfall, he fair game for cheap shots? How cheap is this?: SharonInJax posted:
    Nothing like having your pimp sitting in your parents' house, playing with your children.
    Spare me your indignation.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#90)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:06:28 PM EST
    Newport, Sarcasm; pretty sure you guessed that. I agree with you and feel the same outrage. I wonder if the hearing of the motions (if they are heard) will be a public event. Who would want to miss this spectacle: defense counsel, knees trembling, attempting vainly to counter and parry the onslaught of arguments devised by the legal powerhouse that is the mind of Mr. Nifong.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#91)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:10:45 PM EST
    Bob, the FA told numerous stories in her various interviews with various medical personnel re anal rape. In some interviews she said she was anally raped, in others she denied it. The important fact for purposes of Himan's affidavit and Nifong's misstatements to the press and the evidence in this case is that the examining Doctor reported nothing "notable" in the rectal examination. According to IMHO, this is meaningless because proof of anal rape does not require any "signs, symptoms, or injuries," consistent with anal rape, because "no signs, no symptoms, or no injuries" is also consistent with anal rape. Go figure. Try that one on a jury. BTW: To repeat: the SANE nurse Levicy made NO findings about "consistency" with rape. As others have pointed out, that is not her role.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#92)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:15:29 PM EST
    Madison, I posted earlier a quote of Nifong that says it all about the unbelievable hubris of this man. Yeah, I guess Cheshire and Osborn are quaking in their boots about the thought of going up against a legal giant like Nifong. Isn't this the same Nifong that has only tried traffic tickets since 1999?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#93)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:19:25 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    According to IMHO, this is meaningless because proof of anal rape does not require any "signs, symptoms, or injuries," consistent with anal rape, because "no signs, no symptoms, or no injuries" is also consistent with anal rape.
    That is not what I said.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#94)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:22:01 PM EST
    IMHO, yeah it is:
    Lora, inmyhumbleopinion (6/16 5:37 pm) said: I think what we are seeing here is the fact that no signs, no injury and no symptoms are considered to be consistent with being raped and sexually assaulted vaginally and anally.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#95)
    by blcc on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:22:05 PM EST
    Madison,
    the S.A.N.E.'s physical examination of the woman carries no evidentiary weight?
    Good question. I'm not exactly sure how to answer it, as the weighing process introduces a certain amount of bias in each evaluator's mind. I interpret the physical findings to be non-traumatic, and consistent with a sexually active adult female. Personally, as evidence I'd weigh them heavily - towards the defense's version of events. IANAL.
    But because the evidence during such an exam is collected according to a standard protocol designed to better preserve it, do we then have greater confidence in the DNA results performed on said evidence?
    Possibly - the evidence collection protocol and the lab's ability to analyze it would be the two biggest variables in getting conclusive results - assuming there is evidence to gather.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#96)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:25:46 PM EST
    How cheap is this?: SharonInJax posted: Nothing like having your pimp sitting in your parents' house, playing with your children.
    Not cheap at all. It seems like a very mild demonstration of disapproval of having your pimp playing with your children.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#97)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:30:39 PM EST
    Newport posted: IMHO, yeah it is:
    Lora, inmyhumbleopinion (6/16 5:37 pm) said:
    I think what we are seeing here is the fact that no signs, no injury and no symptoms are considered to be consistent with being raped and sexually assaulted vaginally and anally.
    Nope. There it isn't. Not one word about "proof of anal rape."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#98)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:32:31 PM EST
    To those that are willing to give the FA some slack because she is obviously "messed up" what about this: she sat in a police station and knowing full well that no one raped her, and knowing full well that she was about to destroy the lives of three innocent young men who had everything going for them, proceded to randomly pick three men out of a lineup and then even cry when she picked one of them. That is pure evil.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#99)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:36:24 PM EST
    blcc, Do you know what kinds of evidence are collected from within the ...cavities? This is a separate issue from the visual exam of the tissues. Is evidence sought for collection from the v*ginal walls, evidence other than semen? What I am getting at is skin tissue, perhaps trace semen not visible even under magnification. Also, traces of rubber from a condom, again not visible necessarily to the naked eye. Was any of this done, would you think, as a normal part of the evidence collection protocol? Although I do not work in forensic science, I am intimately familiar with the capabilities afforded by analytical chemistry. Questions about whether or not a condom was used should really be answerable.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#100)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:38:04 PM EST
    Ever the wordsmith, IMHO. Let me *fix* what I said, According to IMHO, this is meaningless because proof of anal rape does not require any "signs, symptoms, or injuries," consistent with anal rape, because "no signs, no symptoms, or no injuries" is also consistent with anal rape.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#101)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:39:08 PM EST
    Sorry, screwed up the previous. Let's try this. Ever the wordsmith, IMHO. Let me *fix* what I said, According to IMHO, this is meaningless because anal rape does not require any "signs, symptoms, or injuries," consistent with anal rape, because "no signs, no symptoms, or no injuries" is also consistent with anal rape.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#102)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:40:33 PM EST
    Madison posted:
    I wonder if the hearing of the motions (if they are heard) will be a public event. Who would want to miss this spectacle: defense counsel, knees trembling, attempting vainly to counter and parry the onslaught of arguments devised by the legal powerhouse that is the mind of Mr. Nifong.
    Did you see Seligmann's hearing? Osborn didn't look too confident, especially after a few mild rebukes from Judge Stephens. Nifong seemed to be enjoying himself.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#103)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:44:03 PM EST
    Madison,
    Questions about whether or not a condom was used should really be answerable
    Unfortunately, any swabbings that could have been analyzed for rubber or the like would not be probative of much here because the FA had sex with at least 5 men and maybe as many as 7 in the several days prior to the night in question. Some of these men may have used condoms, although the "boyfriend," did not.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#104)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:47:01 PM EST
    Did you see Seligmann's hearing? Osborn didn't look too confident, especially after a few mild rebukes from Judge Stephens. Nifong seemed to be enjoying himself
    . Nifong was enjoying himself because he suffers from a personality disorder related to his vanity.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#105)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:49:22 PM EST
    I am sure Osborn was nervous. He has been entrusted with the most solemn of tasks, defending an innocent man.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#106)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:49:29 PM EST
    IMHO says:
    SharonInJax posted:
    Nothing like having your pimp sitting in your parents' house, playing with your children.
    Spare me your indignation.
    I have forgotten the context in which Sharon said that, but I took it to mean that the AV's pimp was telling her (the AV):
    You are vulnerable. I know where your children are.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#107)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:51:26 PM EST
    Newport posted: Second try. Nope. Third try. Nope. Try again.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#108)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:58:30 PM EST
    IMHO, no thanks. There is only so much "beating of ones' head against a wall" that one should engage in, and I have more than reached that point. If you don't get that there is a problem with Himan's affidavit that started this whole thing: "Medical records and interviews that were obtained by a subpoena revealed the victim had signs, symptoms, and injuries consistent with being raped and sexually assaulted vaginally and anally. Furthermore, the SANE nurse stated the injuries and her behavior were consistent with a traumatic experience." when the examining doctor reported nothing notable in the rectal examination, and when the FA said multiple times she wasn't anally raped, then there is nothing further I can do.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#109)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:03:11 PM EST
    beenaround posted:
    I have forgotten the context in which Sharon said that, but I took it to mean that the AV's pimp was telling her (the AV):
    You are vulnerable. I know where your children are.
    Nope.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#110)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:09:53 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    I am sure Osborn was nervous. He has been entrusted with the most solemn of tasks, defending an innocent man.
    I was responding to this post of yours: Newport posted:
    I posted earlier a quote of Nifong that says it all about the unbelievable hubris of this man. Yeah, I guess Cheshire and Osborn are quaking in their boots about the thought of going up against a legal giant like Nifong. Isn't this the same Nifong that has only tried traffic tickets since 1999?
    My apologies, I thought you were being sarcastic, but I now see you did note how nervous Osborn seemed when he went up against Nifong at Seligmann's hearing.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#111)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:11:07 PM EST
    I did indeed.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#112)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:11:13 PM EST
    Newport: I give the accuser this much slack: her initial accusations were not intended to be malicious, I don't believe. After all, she had made a strikingly similar accusation in the past with apparently no harm coming to the individuals she accused because she did not follow up on it, and it was dropped appropriately. I think she just didn't want to go to jail or rehab or whatever. In her panic, she went to an old story; but the details needed to be changed and in this process inconsistencies arose because of her intoxication from alcohol and a muscle relaxant, both of which she chose to take by her own account, or one or more of her accounts. Enter Mr. Nifong. How often does opportunity knock? I believe she could have been threatened with filing a false police report if she recanted. Do you not believe he is capable of this? Still, facing the consequences of your choices is part of being an adult, and she can choose to accept responsibility at any point (unless she has a mental defect). She is the one person who can end this travesty with a single statement. In my opinion, her lack of courage at this juncture is a failure of character. I will change my estimation only when she recants. BTW, thanks for fielding that post. I wondered when that was gonna happen.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#113)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:11:54 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    Unfortunately, any swabbings that could have been analyzed for rubber or the like would not be probative of much here because the FA had sex with at least 5 men and maybe as many as 7 in the several days prior to the night in question. Some of these men may have used condoms, although the "boyfriend," did not.
    Source?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#114)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:12:47 PM EST
    And I was being sarcastic in the prior post too.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#115)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:15:22 PM EST
    Newport posted: Unfortunately, any swabbings that could have been analyzed for rubber or the like would not be probative of much here because the FA had sex with at least 5 men and maybe as many as 7 in the several days prior to the night in question. Some of these men may have used condoms, although the "boyfriend," did not. Source?
    The statement of Jariel Johnson, the original N&O interview given by the FA, and common sense.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#116)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:16:47 PM EST
    Madison, I agree with your thoughtful preceding post 100 percent.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#117)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:21:43 PM EST
    Newport wrote:
    then there is nothing further I can do.
    Then don't. Boorish behavior, cheap shots, one-upsmanship, accusing others of being "whiners"---none of it should be rewarded. Whattaya think, common genes? More likely just another from the same cesspool, I would guess. Tenacious as a pit bull; blind as a bat! Whosit?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#118)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:24:29 PM EST
    IMHO, I think you should bookmark this post of yours so that you can rely on it when you tell everyone how you don't engage in personal attacks.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#119)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:36:22 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    The statement of Jariel Johnson, the original N&O interview given by the FA, and common sense.
    That's your proof the "FA had sex with at least 5 men and maybe as many as 7 in the several days prior to the night in question?"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#120)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:38:01 PM EST
    Yes

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#121)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:43:32 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    IMHO, I think you should bookmark this post of yours so that you can rely on it when you tell everyone how you don't engage in personal attacks.
    When did I say that? Bookmark which post? This one? I didn't write that, Madison did.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#122)
    by ding7777 on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:46:44 PM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion
    Did you see Seligmann's hearing? Osborn didn't look too confident, especially after a few mild rebukes from Judge Stephens.
    Isn't this the hearing where Seligmann/Osborn asked for a speedy/fast track trial and the judge said no? could you lists the "few mild rebukes" that the judge issued?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#123)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:50:30 PM EST
    IMHO, The whole thread and especially the part where you attack Sharon when she was showing some humanity.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#124)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:56:01 PM EST
    Madison is right about the double standard you live by. Accuse others of personal attacks, whining, cheap shots, etc. and ignore all of your own behavior in this regard.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#125)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:29:54 PM EST
    imho, referencing my comments, you quoted me and said:
    How cheap is this?: SharonInJax posted: Nothing like having your pimp sitting in your parents' house, playing with your children. Spare me your indignation.
    Whether you believe me or not, my introductory sentence was, "how sad is this?" and I meant it sincerely, as in "how sad is it to live a life where this happens?" That was not "indignation" about that scenario, nor was it a condemnation of the AV, at lease it was not intented to be. I was feeling genuine pity for her situation, and for her children.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#126)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:36:28 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    Whether you believe me or not, my introductory sentence was, "how sad is this?" and I meant it sincerely, as in "how sad is it to live a life where this happens?" That was not "indignation" about that scenario, nor was it a condemnation of the AV, at lease it was not intented to be. I was feeling genuine pity for her situation, and for her children.
    What is sympathetic about the phrasing of this comment? SharonInJax posted:
    Nothing like having your pimp sitting in your parents' house, playing with your children.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#128)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:38:58 PM EST
    ding7777 posted:
    could you lists the "few mild rebukes" that the judge issued?
    Judge Bristles At Defense Requests In Duke Rape Case
    But Stephens clearly bristled when Osborn asked to have free access to law enforcement records.
    "I'm not going to sign an order allowing you to go rummage through all law enforcement records," he said. "I'm not going to order things that I believe will be done voluntarily."
    When Osborn said he made the request because "this is a serious case," the judge cut him off.
    "I deal with serious cases every day," he said. "This case is not going to jump ahead of the line of all of the other cases that we have here or be handled in any other way."
    Complete Video Of Reade Seligmann's Court Appearance

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#129)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:39:22 PM EST
    You keep neglecting to quote the lead-in, imho. I did not say, "how disgusting is this?" nor did I say, "how shameful is this?" nor did I say, "what a horrible mother she is." But even given that, is there something about what I wrote that is not true about what Jarriel described? Would you prefer I had said, "How sad is this: The driver for your escort service sitting in your parents' house playing with your daughter?"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#130)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:54:19 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    The driver for your escort service sitting in your parents' house playing with your daughter?"
    What do you find sad about her driver playing with her kids? Would you feel different if her driver/manager was dropping her off at a nightclub to perform as a singer? What do you think of people who work for escort services?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#131)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:56:26 PM EST
    Sharon, those are all things that I would say and I believe them all to be true. You, however, have shown genuine empathy for the AV in this case. That is why I expressed outrage that IMHO would attack you over this. More word games by IMHO to justify the attack, "driver" not "pimp." Please.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#132)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:02:28 PM EST
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#133)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:04:53 PM EST
    I never said I haven't pointed out the deficiencies of your arguments and I may have done it in colorful language to get my point across out of frustration. You have deserved every bit of it and more in my opinion.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#134)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:05:06 PM EST
    I dunno, imho: maybe I try to imagine what it would be like, seeing my daughter (especially at a young age when she is forming her views of men, of male/female interactions and roles, etc.) playing with a man who sits outside in a car while I go into bars trying to find a man to "escort," a man who makes money from the selling my sexuality, of my body, of my pride, and I say to myself, "I can't imagine how awful that would feel." There is, as you well know, a huge difference between a "driver/manager" who works FOR a nightclub singer, and a "pimp" who uses women and their bodies to make money for himself. How do I feel about people who work for escort services? I pity the women and despise the men. How's that?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#135)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:09:42 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    How do I feel about people who work for escort services? I pity the women and despise the men. How's that?
    You despise the men that hire the escorts?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#136)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:17:23 PM EST
    How do I feel about people who work for escort services? I pity the women and despise the men. How's that?
    I agree with this and I would despise the men who hire the escorts for performance as a prostitute. Anticipating an attack, the Duke boys did not hire the FA as a prostitute but as a dancer.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#137)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:20:44 PM EST
    Actually, mik, in the OJ case the general opinion was that the jury acquitted on their prejudices. I actually bought the book that was ghost-written for several of the jury members and didn't find a lick of information in it, so I don't know all that much about their reasoning for accepting or rejecting certain pieces of evidence. They would have been better served by a better writer. I am one of the few white people left in America who think that Simpson was innocent. If you hit my name and go to my blog and then hit the Archive button and then go to April 22, 2005 you'll see a post on the OJ case which I think pretty much blows the possibility that Simpson did it out of the water. He, or anyone, couldn't have done it the way the prosecution said the crime was committed. But I agree your greater point, that juries will ignore evidence and vote their prejudices, is true. That's all the more reason for a DA not to inflame the jury pool like Nifong has, or hide exculpatory information from the grand jury. Running the ID process fairly is another check against false prosecution which didn't happen here. When a jury is seated there is a presumption that law enforcement and the district attorney, in their duties as public servants who are charged with seeking justice, have already weighed the evidence and made a determination that there is really at least a predominance of evidence leaning towards a crime having been committed. If anything, the behavior of Nifong and Himan will guarantee that jurors familiar with their misadventures will be less likely to trust prosecutors in the future. I guess it's good to maintain a healthy skepticism on any jury, but this may bring about an unhealthy skepticism.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#138)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:21:39 PM EST
    Some commentary from the web on this: Shifting the Goalposts
    As the presumed "facts" initially associated with the Duke lacrosse case have melted away, those on campus who aggressively condemned the lacrosse players have found themselves in an uncomfortable position. ...


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#139)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:27:29 PM EST
    Ahhhh, imho, there you go again, asking one question then trying to change the question after it is answered. You asked:
    What do you think of people who work for escort services?
    Men who hire escorts do not work for escort services, now do they? But to play along: I'm closer to pitying men who hire escorts than despising them, somewhere in the middle I suppose. There weren't any "men who hire escorts" sitting in the AV's parents' house though, so what does that group of men have to do with my original comment and your interpretation of what I said?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#140)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:46:21 PM EST
    Thanks for the link, beenaround. Interesting article/post. The author said, talking about citations for underage drinking and noise violations against Duke students, that the informal "deal" was those charged would not be prosecuted if they would pay a fine, do community service, etc.:
    Several weeks ago, however, Nifong revoked the deals regarding the 15 lacrosse players (but not the other 385 Duke students cited for comparable offenses).
    I wish the author had given a link or some authority for that because, if it is true, that is another sign that Nifong is not performing his duties fairly.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#141)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:06:52 PM EST
    sharon said:
    I wish the author had given a link or some authority for that because, if it is true, that is another sign that Nifong is not performing his duties fairly.
    Here's the link.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#142)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:22:18 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    But to play along: I'm closer to pitying men who hire escorts than despising them, somewhere in the middle I suppose. There weren't any "men who hire escorts" sitting in the AV's parents' house though, so what does that group of men have to do with my original comment and your interpretation of what I said?
    I was just wondering what it was you pitied about the women and despised about the men that worked in the escort business and what you thought of the men/women who hire escorts. Thanks for your answers. Newport posted:
    I agree with this and I would despise the men who hire the escorts for performance as a prostitute. Anticipating an attack, the Duke boys did not hire the FA as a prostitute but as a dancer.
    Bissey said after he saw the women exit the house the first time he heard one of the guys say to his friends, "It's only a hundred dollars," before the women were coaxed back inside. I wonder what the player was talking about?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#143)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:24:24 PM EST
    "Medical records and interviews that were obtained by a subpoena revealed the victim had signs, symptoms, and injuries consistent with being raped and sexually assaulted vaginally and anally. Furthermore, the SANE nurse stated the injuries and her behavior were consistent with a traumatic experience." Won't Himan make an interesting witness? The question is at what court proceeding he'll testify. It would be nice if a judge would actually entertain some of the defense's motions. By the way, one's demeanor while having a New Black Panther sitting behind you mouthing something akin to death threats is probably not the best circumstance to weigh one's relative strength in a court case.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#144)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:24:56 PM EST
    Thanks khartoum: I had read that Nifong withdrew the deals for the lax players, but didn't realize that he left them in place for other Duke students. So much for equal treatment under the law.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#145)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:42:00 PM EST
    IMHO posted,
    Bissey said after he saw the women exit the house the first time he heard one of the guys say to his friends, "It's only a hundred dollars," before the women were coaxed back inside. I wonder what the player was talking about?
    Well then it certainly couldn't be rape now, could it? Toche

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#146)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:42:51 PM EST
    "Equal treatment under the law" is a joke in Durham. I was once told the following expression: "thank God for Mississippi" The idea was that your state couldn't finish last in anything -- education, SAT scores, roads, etc. -- as you'd always be at least 49th out of 50 states in the U.S. at worst due to Mississippe. When it comes to prosecutorial misconduct, people can say "thank God for North Carolina"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#147)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:43:34 PM EST
    If this case ever makes it to trial, Himan will be shredded. It won't be pretty.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#148)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:53:57 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    Well then it certainly couldn't be rape now, could it? Toche
    Do you think the $100 was about paying the women for sex? Wow. I thought they were paying them to leave. Isn't that the story? Shoving money under the bathroom door?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#149)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:21:40 PM EST
    Posted by SharonInJax June 17, 2006 06:46 PM
    Thanks for the link, beenaround. Interesting article/post. The author said, talking about citations for underage drinking and noise violations against Duke students, that the informal "deal" was those charged would not be prosecuted if they would pay a fine, do community service, etc.:
    Several weeks ago, however, Nifong revoked the deals regarding the 15 lacrosse players (but not the other 385 Duke students cited for comparable offenses).
    I wish the author had given a link or some authority for that because, if it is true, that is another sign that Nifong is not performing his duties fairly
    Posted by SharonInJax June 17, 2006 07:24 PM
    Thanks khartoum: I had read that Nifong withdrew the deals for the lax players, but didn't realize that he left them in place for other Duke students. So much for equal treatment under the law.
    Lacrosse players face old charges
    Nifong said he will reinstate the charges against players whose deferred prosecution deals are still active, unless they can show they were not at the party.
    He said he is reinstating a noise violation and an alcohol possession charge against Evans because he was one of the men who threw the party.
    "He was one of the people who rented the house that was serving alcohol to underage people and hiring strippers," Nifong said in an interview. "In order to put somebody under deferred prosecution, the DA has to, under requirements of the statute, certify that he does not believe the person is likely to do any further criminal acts. Under the circumstances, it's hard for me to see how we could maintain that."
    Do we know if it has been brought to the DA's attention that any of the other 385 Duke students cited for comparable offenses may have hosted or attended a party were minors were provided with alcohol? These are the players with deferred prosecution deals that were active: * Edward James Crotty, 19, cited Aug. 27 for public urination. Deferred prosecution; review July 14. * David Evans, 22, cited Aug. 25 for possessing a can of beer in passenger area of a car; also cited Jan. 10 for noise ordinance violation. Deferred prosecution; review in August. * Daniel P. Flannery, 22, cited Jan. 10 for noise violation. Court date: April 18. * Erik Steven Henkelman, 22, cited Aug. 24 for noise violation. Deferred prosecution; review in June. * Kevin Michael Mayer, 19, cited Feb. 12, 2005, for obtaining property by false pretenses. Deferred prosecution; review in July. * Kenneth Joseph Sauer III, 22, cited Aug. 25 for possessing an open container of alcohol in a vehicle and Oct. 1 on a noise ordinance violation. Accepted into first- offenders program. * Robert R. Schroeder, 19, cited for obtaining property by false pretenses on Feb. 11, 2005, and April 3 and 8, 2005. Deferred prosecution; review in July. * Christopher James Tkac, 19, cited Dec. 2 for underage possession of malt beverage and public urination. Court date: July 28. None are among the five players the captains listed as not being at the party.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#150)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:23:49 PM EST
    That is why I expressed outrage that IMHO would attack you over this.
    I think "TL does not tolerate abuse/personal insults on this site" actually means "I think TL will tolerate people who don't question the defense and see the 'boys' through rose-tinted glasses walking all over people who don't and flying off the handle at them when they won't back down, but them reacting like a MEANY won't be tolerated."
    Durgha. Never, to my knowledge was open to the possibility the FA could be lying.
    If that is supposed to be my name, when did I say I wasn't open to the possibility the AV be lying? About anything from the details, to the rape itself? People need to get the h*ll out of their false dichotomy bubbles.
    ...but I have decided that Durga is too vexatious to my spirit for me to attempt any sort of dialogue.
    Yeah, I didn't think that after I had actually answered your question for you and asked you that one you'd like it very much...

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#151)
    by ding7777 on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:46:43 PM EST
    DURHAM - A judge dismissed a noise ordinance violation charge filed against a Duke University lacrosse player. Erik Steven Henkelman, 22, was charged Aug. 24 with violating the city's noise regulations. The court deferred prosecution of the case until this month. On Friday, a judge dismissed the charge. link

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#152)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:51:13 PM EST
    This is classic Yale Galanter. His commentary on this case is a disgrace. To her credit, Rita Cosby kept correcting him. Dan Abrams just crowed along with him. 'Rita Cosby Live & Direct' for May 15
    COSBY: Let me bring in Yale. Real quickly Yale. I am going to give you the last word. Go ahead you have got a few seconds.
    GALANTER: Rita, this case from the beginning has revolved around the credibility of the complaining witness. The complaining witness's own father called her a liar in the 1996 incident. This complaining witness, who is the father says was bruised, cut. The first police officer...
    COSBY: Actually, Yale...
    COSBY: Yale, I have got to correct you. I spoke to the father. He said he didn't know about it and he found out about it later.
    GALANTER: No, he said she didn't have sex with the boy, and she wasn't assaulted. And basically called the report a complete hoax.
    COSBY: Yale, that's not true. Yale, that's not true.
    GALANTER: The first police officer on the scene does not see any bruises, marks on her body.
    MURPHY: Yale stop talking. You are making a false statement.
    GALANTER: Her credibility is an issue.
    COSBY: Yale, that is not true. Yale, you got to listen. What he said is he did not know about it until later. It does bring up questions, but he said he did not know about it until.
    GALANTER: He stated in an "Essence Magazine" article, Rita, that he was not aware that she was sexually assaulted.
    COSBY: Which is different than calling her a liar.
    Both of you thank you.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#153)
    by ding7777 on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:54:09 PM EST
    DURHAM, N.C. - A judge on Tuesday acquitted a Duke University lacrosse team captain of violating a noise ordinance and said authorities "could make better use" of the court's time without bringing such minor offenses to trial. The misdemeanor charge against Dan Flannery stemmed from a party Jan. 10, when a neighbor called police to complain about what sounded like a drum beat coming from a nearby house link

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#154)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:18:06 PM EST
    I was going to ask you to clarify your question to me, Durga, but before I could do that I saw another of your posts, reminding everyone about my use of the AV's first name: twice in one night, before I realized that TL's rules and others sensibilities would be violated, and another time inadvertently. Oh, and don't forget I posted a link to a site that uses the AV's full name and failed to warn anyone. Don't let me off the hook for that one. I think those are the only times. If, as it seems apparent, you cannot let go of that, then I see little point in trying to carry on a dialogue with you.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#155)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:26:01 PM EST
    IMHO writes: Do you think the $100 was about paying the women for sex? Wow. I thought they were paying them to leave. Isn't that the story? Shoving money under the bathroom door? This is IMHO throwing a Hail Mary. If the $100 was about buying sex, it was either sex with the AV or Roberts. It could have been a reference to an offer of services by the AV, which would dovetail with the AV's alleged comments to Roberts in Roberts' early version of events. But then it wouldn't have been rape, would it? Or it could be an offer that Roberts floated. She apparently wasn't "out of control" at the time, so if I were a young man considering buying the services of a prostitute she might be a more likely candidate. From either the AV's story or Roberts' story, neither of them solicited or sold their wares, so if we're talking strictly from the ladies version of events the young men couldn't have been talking about a price if no offer were made. Maybe they were talking about a more reliable purveyor of sexual services not at the premises. Who knows? So we're left with the story of the men offering inducements for the women to leave. Only I doubt anyone stuck a hundred dollars under the door. If Bissey heard the $100 comment and it was about sex services, it seems most likely it would have had to have come from the AV. But perhaps the men decided the AV, in her intoxicated state, wasn't terribly appealing. Or maybe the AV was just too drunk to actually make it back into the house, or she was locked out. By the way, a couple guys shoving money under the bathroom door for the women to leave is not in conflict with a couple of other men talking about whether the AV was worth a hundred bucks for a bounce. And neither scenario shows that any gang rape occurred. Quite the opposite. One shows no sex and the men wanting the women to leave; the other shows that the AV was willing to have sex for a price. It's all conjecture, and IMHO only wants to throw it into the discussion to disparage the men at the party. They were not going to pay teammates to rape the AV. And it sounds like, whatever Bissey heard, no one took the AV up on any offer. +++ Just to clarify, IMHO is not so much a defender of the AV as an attacker of the men on the lacrosse team. I'm not sure of her motive. I remember that azballfan hated Duke and would advance any argument that would besmirch the college, but I'm not sure what IMHO's motives are. Maybe after we get the diagnosis of the AV's mental illness we can petition to have IMHO's relevant psycho-history released.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#156)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:26:47 PM EST
    Beenaround, in case you are new here, it is not acceptable to post links to the accuser's name or personal data. I've deleted it, but please know it's an offense I consider ban-nable.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#157)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:31:18 PM EST
    TL Says ...
    Beenaround, in case you are new here, it is not acceptable to post links to the accuser's name or personal data. I've deleted it, but please know it's an offense I consider ban-nable.
    Thanks for the warning.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#158)
    by ding7777 on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:33:01 PM EST
    to Bob In Pacifica Just a thought (if there was $100 involved)... maybe the $100 was for Kim and Precious to perform on each other

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#127)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:34:37 PM EST
    deleted

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#159)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:35:32 PM EST
    Durga wrote: when did I say I wasn't open to the possibility the AV be lying? About anything from the details, to the rape itself? People need to get the h*ll out of their false dichotomy bubbles. Help us out our false dichotomy bubbles. Do you entertain the possibility that the AV is lying? Go ahead, pop those bubbles. Be expansive.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#160)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:36:41 PM EST
    BIP, ding, What if the $100 bucks was just whatever the unnamed theoretical player had thrown in as his share of payment for the night's entertainment? If it was a captain, or co-host of the party, or even an underclassman asked to pony up some $$ for beer money and strippers, he might have been ticked at the way the evening devolved, and the perceived "waste" of money.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#161)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:38:18 PM EST
    PB, no one has to donate to TalkLeft. It's totally voluntary, and if someone doesn't have the money, they shouldn't feel compelled to give anything. TalkLeft is not a "for profit" site, it is a hobby of mine. The ads cover some expenses but bandwidth is expensive and the Duke threads have generated more comments than any other subject in the 4 years I've been doing this. I don't see a need to eliminate all your comments or ban you. Just be respectful of bandwidth and post when you feel you have something to contribute and we'll all get along fine.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#162)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:39:25 PM EST
    ding7777 posted:
    Just a thought (if there was $100 involved)... maybe the $100 was for Kim and Precious to perform on each other
    According to Dan Abrams, the time-stamped photos of them performing sex acts on each other while buck-naked were taken before Bissey would have overheard that conversation about the $100.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#163)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:43:51 PM EST
    ding wrote: to Bob In Pacifica Just a thought (if there was $100 involved)... maybe the $100 was for Kim and Precious to perform on each other Gee, if they'd only waited they could have watched the two performing all sorts of different ways, on each other, on the party attendees, on the civil rights of the defendants, and in public too! It's costing more than $100 for the performances, though.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#164)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:50:10 PM EST
    Actually, the $100 could have been about something else entirely, and entertaining IMHO's snark in no way limited the possibilities. I just wanted to show her snark wasn't helping the AV's case.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#165)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:51:34 PM EST
    TalkLeft posted:
    TalkLeft is not a "for profit" site, it is a hobby of mine. The ads cover some expenses but bandwidth is expensive and the Duke threads have generated more comments than any other subject in the 4 years I've been doing this.
    I assume your traffic has increased as well. If you don't mind my asking, does the increase in visitors, page views and average duration of visit effect your advertising rates? Are less active threads less financially draining? Are the Duke threads not generating enough increased traffic to cover the cost of the bandwidth it uses?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#166)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:06:24 PM EST
    Imho attacks Yale Galanter,
    This is classic Yale Galanter. His commentary on this case is a disgrace. To her credit, Rita Cosby kept correcting him. Dan Abrams just crowed along with him.
    But . . . the fact is that the father did say "those boys didn't do anything to her." So is the father calling his own daughter a "lier"? Well, I would suggest that imho has called people "LIERs" for much less reason than Galanter did. It turns out that just about everything that Galanter has said about this case has been true from day one. Cosby on the other hand has dropped the coverage now that it isn't quite so sensational about people sticking broomsticks up the FA's *** and all that other nonsense the father was spewing.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#167)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:09:56 PM EST
    Newport, Reread that interview. Rita Cosby interviewed the father, Yale did not. She corrects him through the whole interview.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#168)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:14:37 PM EST
    Bob wrote,
    Just to clarify, IMHO is not so much a defender of the AV as an attacker of the men on the lacrosse team. I'm not sure of her motive. I remember that azballfan hated Duke and would advance any argument that would besmirch the college, but I'm not sure what IMHO's motives are. Maybe after we get the diagnosis of the AV's mental illness we can petition to have IMHO's relevant psycho-history released.
    There are a lot of Duke haters out there. Not quite sure why but the snake venom spit at Duke is remarkable. Some have suggested jealousy, others have offered other less persuasive excuses. I do think that IMHO hates the Duke men and has made it her mission in life to disparage them. Maybe imho went to UNC? who knows.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#169)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:16:39 PM EST
    IMHO, Rita Cosby doesn't know what she is talking about. Why is that so hard for you to understand. The father stated that "those boys didn't do anything to her" and that's a fact.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#170)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:22:13 PM EST
    thinkandtype posted:
    What if the $100 bucks was just whatever the unnamed theoretical player had thrown in as his share of payment for the night's entertainment?
    $100 bucks? Pretty steep cover charge - two case minimum included? If they all kicked in that much, they'd have over $4,000 bucks.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#171)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:24:36 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    Rita Cosby doesn't know what she is talking about. Why is that so hard for you to understand. The father stated that "those boys didn't do anything to her" and that's a fact.
    If you do not know the circumstances of his saying that to a reporter, you need to brush up on the facts of this case. I've been over it many times here before.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#172)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:28:53 PM EST
    Thinkandtype wrote,
    BIP, ding, What if the $100 bucks was just whatever the unnamed theoretical player had thrown in as his share of payment for the night's entertainment? If it was a captain, or co-host of the party, or even an underclassman asked to pony up some $$ for beer money and strippers, he might have been ticked at the way the evening devolved, and the perceived "waste" of money.
    This, of course, is what the discussion was about from all we know about the case. The boy's felt ripped off for paying $400 for a two hour show and instead getting a 4 minute performance by an intoxicated stripper. I don't think there is any question that the boys were mad about this and wanted their money back. No one has ever denied this. Imho just was playing her little game with the hail mary after she was cornered.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#173)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:33:06 PM EST
    imho,
    If you do not know the circumstances of his saying that to a reporter, you need to brush up on the facts of this case. I've been over it many times here before
    since I am relatively new here, I do not know that to which you refer. Based on what I do know about how you attempt to twist facts that other people would think untwistable, I am not persuaded that the father did not say something very close to what I stated.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#174)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:40:17 PM EST
    I was going to ask you to clarify your question to me, Durga, but before I could do that I saw another of your posts, reminding everyone about my use of the AV's first name: If, as it seems apparent, you cannot let go of that, then I see little point in trying to carry on a dialogue with you.
    ...And if you had bothered to read thoroughly before putting on your martyr hat, you'd see the only reason I "reminded everyone" about your use of her name was in response to Bob In Pacifica bringing it up while rambling on for four or five paragraphs about things that had nothing to do with the question I had asked you after I had answered your's -
    I don't know what you do or don't comprehend or what you think is intellectual or pseudo-intellectual. If you have trouble understanding things, read them over, or go back and check the context. You haven't impressed me as an intellectual giant either. Maybe we read different books. What I have done for the last few days is comment on IMHO's intellectually dishonest games here. I don't think that many here besides a couple of fans (or alter egos) think that she's a particularly honest seeker of truth. And IMHO hasn't responded to what I wrote, as she hasn't responded to others here, when her bogus act is exposed. In an honest discussion, you discuss. If IMHO can waste two or three days berating Coleman for mentioning the investigators' failure to use fillers, when her own definition of what constitutes a filler even doesn't jibe with real-world standards, and all her marginal arguments had already been answered a long time ago by TL, then she must be able to find the time to answer a few questions. That's not her game, though. And it is a game. Your game is to bring up that Sharon mentioned the AV's name. You're due to bring it up again.
    ... as, clearly, that is a sign of "stalking". So, as you can see, the only reason I said what I did -
    Yeah? Very nice. All I did was answer a question for Sharon and then asked her one, nothing about mentioning the AV's name 3 times. So get off it.
    ... was to show that it had nothing to do with what I had asked you, Bob was once again trying to denigrate people who don't agree with him while everything else goes riiight over his head. In the process, he brought it up. But, hey, its going to be on me to scale back about being misrepresented now, right? At this point, you needn't mind having not been able to answer the initial question as I don't want to have to be drawing things in crayon anymore. I'm sure imho is long tired of it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#175)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:48:26 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    since I am relatively new here, I do not know that to which you refer. Based on what I do know about how you attempt to twist facts that other people would think untwistable, I am not persuaded that the father did not say something very close to what I stated.
    He did say it to a reporter before his wife told him that their daughter was raped during the Creedmore incident. inmyhumbleopinion May 7, 2006 10:06 PM Bob in Pacifica posted:
    Her father said something to the effect that "those boys did nothing to her." So if you believe the dad, take your pick. She lied or she hallucinated.
    imho posted:
    This discrepancy has been explained many times here. The mother said they didn't tell the father because they were afraid he would drive to Creedmore and confront the boyfriend and get himself hurt. The father is described as being "120 lbs, dripping wet."
    ONE WEEK LATER... inmyhumbleopinion May 14, 2006 11:26 AM Bob in Pacifica posted:
    And if you believe that, then you have to weigh the father's comments about the 1993 (1994?) rape, about which he said something to the effect that "those boys didn't do nothin' to her." That is, the AV's father said that his daughter filed a false rape charge back then.
    imho posted:
    Bob, this is my problem with you. You know the mother has explained why they kept the 1993 rape from the father. How many times have I typed out "a reporter described him as 'all of 120 lbs soaking wet?'


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#176)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:57:54 PM EST
    IMHO, When was the father's statement made? If the father hadn't been told about the Creedmore rape allegation at the time he made his statement, what prompted him to say "those boys didn't do anything to her?" Maybe he investigated the facts and determined that "those boys didn't do anything to her." Do you know for a fact that he didn't know about the allegation and investigate? Did he at a later time say "boy, I didn't know what I was talking about because I didn't even know she alleged a rape?"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#177)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:58:22 PM EST
    Is it at all possible that what Bissey overheard was, "It's only four (or even eight) hundred dollars"? He wasn't within the group of people having the conversation. He was on his porch next door. It's unlikely that this was shouted, a la the cotton tee shirt remark. I think (that is, I have no evidence to support this position) that the accuser left behind several of her belongings including her purse. I believe it is likely that the party goers enacted a "refund" due to the dancing only lasting less than ten minutes. Whatever monies remained in the accuser's belongings (i.e., the $160 the police found) were monies she had in her possesion when she arrived at the party. Therefore, the $400 that Kim was paid was the only money paid for the "entertainment" for the evening, and the amount of money the party goers would have bemoaned.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#178)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:07:15 PM EST
    mik, I don't know if the boys exercised "self help" in recovering what they may have considered an overpayment of funds. I would not doubt it one bit. An interesting question is whether such self help would be against the law. If one pays for services in advance and the services do not meet expectations can the aggrieved party, without violence, take the money back? I would think that the aggrieved party could do this. I may be wrong but I do not that no one has been charged with theft in this case.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#179)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:08:54 PM EST
    typo alert, should be I may be wrong but I do note that no one has been charged with theft in this case.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#180)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:23:36 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    When was the father's statement made? If the father hadn't been told about the Creedmore rape allegation at the time he made his statement, what prompted him to say "those boys didn't do anything to her?" Maybe he investigated the facts and determined that "those boys didn't do anything to her." Do you know for a fact that he didn't know about the allegation and investigate? Did he at a later time say "boy, I didn't know what I was talking about because I didn't even know she alleged a rape?"
    I don't want to look it all up again, but if you google [duke lacrosse creedmoor] I'm sure you'll find many articles to read. This is what I remember reading and seeing the father say on TV: He knew something had happened in Creedmoor, I think he was the one that picked her up afterward. The mother had not ever told the father the "particulars" of what the daughter said happened. About 6 weeks after the lacrosse party, a reporter asked him about the previous rape charges. He denied she had been raped in 1993 in Creedmoor because they still had not told him about it. Finally, his wife had to tell him what their daughter said happened to her 13 years earlier.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#181)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:35:25 PM EST
    Imho wrote,
    About 6 weeks after the lacrosse party, a reporter asked him about the previous rape charges. He denied she had been raped in 1993 in Creedmoor because they still had not told him about it.
    Then why did he say those boys "didn't do anything to her?" What was he talking about? How did he know that? Why didn't he just say, "jeez, I didn't even know she was raped?" IMHO further comments,
    Finally, his wife had to tell him what their daughter said happened to her 13 years earlier.
    Maybe she's not telling the truth here? Is that possible? She does have motivation to lie to protect her daughter from her husband's slip of the tongue, no? Maybe the father was just being truthful and the mother wasn't. Maybe the father knew about the allegation and knew that there was nothing to it. It is really funny how you give the benefit of doubt to the mother in this story (who as I understand it was trying to cook up a civil case with the PI attorney Gary) but you will give no benefit of the doubt to the Duke players. Just one more example of your blatant bias and intellectual dishonesty.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#182)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:39:33 PM EST
    Newport said:
    Maybe the father was just being truthful and the mother wasn't. Maybe the father knew about the allegation and knew that there was nothing to it.
    After a year of teaching my wife confided that she preferred dealing with fathers when she had to tell parents that their student was misbehaving or not acheiving. Her observation was that fathers seemed incapable of lying, while for mothers it seemed a case of whatever works and deny everything. Perhaps that is what is happening here.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#183)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:42:41 PM EST
    mik posted:
    Is it at all possible that what Bissey overheard was, "It's only four (or even eight) hundred dollars"? He wasn't within the group of people having the conversation. He was on his porch next door. It's unlikely that this was shouted, a la the cotton tee shirt remark.
    Hey. I like it, mik. I think Bissey reported it was said sarcastically. "It's only eight hundred dollars" could sound a lot like "It's only A hundred dollars." It is said sarcastically as they see the two strippers getting in the car with "their" $800 dollars.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#184)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:45:09 PM EST
    at this point you needn't mind having not been able to answer the initial question as I don't want to have to be drawing things in crayon anymore. I'm sure imho is long tired of it.
    You know how to use crayons? Coulda fooled me. I bet you only have two colors of crayons too - black and white.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#185)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:46:38 PM EST
    IMHO, why is it so hard for you to accept that one of the players probably ponied up $100 of the $400 total and was mad about losing it for a nonperformance. What makes you think everyone contributed equally? Maybe some of the guys didn't have any cash and maybe one guy had a hundred in his pocket and chipped in more than the others. What do you think that they passed a hat to 40 guys and everyone put a twenty in. Maybe most of them were flat broke.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#186)
    by Lora on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:56:43 PM EST
    re: the SANE program and the vawnet link: from the article (posted by Madison):
    However, such conclusions are tentative because most published studies have not included adequate methodological controls or comparisons to rigorously test the effectiveness of SANE programs
    Also from the article:
    Empirical studies that directly compare the evidence collected by SANE nurses and physicians on objective criteria would better inform the debate over whether nurses are competent medical forensic examiners.
    the comment about inadequate methodological controls are in reference to the studies, not the SANE program. To revisit Ms. Arico,
    "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told."
    She is saying that there are injuries. Injuries that would be consistent with being choked, hit, kicked, and raped. As the head of the program, she wouldn't say there were injuries if there were no injuries. I'm betting that there were injuries and we will find that they were documented. I think we all need to chill. In the beginning of this journey there was a lot of light banter that no one took too seriously. While the subject is anything but fun, it's still good to smile once in a while. Things have gotten a lot nastier lately. I hope no one bothers to come up with examples of either the former or the latter as I don't wish to focus on any particular comments or commenters. I'd just like to focus on the discussion but not have it be so grim. Whether the Duke accused will or will not get off, whether there will or won't be a trial, whether the AV will or will not face the people she says hurt her in court...the outcome will happen REGARDLESS of whatever we say here! So...lighten up, everyone ;-)

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#187)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:02:49 PM EST
    Lora, You just don't believe the defense lawyer's quotations from the medical report re the absence of injuries do you? You think it's possible that defense lawyers made this stuff up when the medical report is attached to the document for the court to see? Why is that?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#188)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:05:19 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    It is really funny how you give the benefit of doubt to the mother in this story (who as I understand it was trying to cook up a civil case with the PI attorney Gary) but you will give no benefit of the doubt to the Duke players. Just one more example of your blatant bias and intellectual dishonesty.
    I have no idea if the accuser is lying about the Creedmoor incident if the mother is lying, if the father is lying, I'm just telling you what their story is so you know better than to assume,like Yale and Bob in Pacifica have, that since the father told the reporter "those boys didn't do nothing to her" that proves she filed a false police report, it doesn't. You are mistaken if you think I am trying to persuade you of anything. I don't care what you or anyone else here believes or doesn't believe about this case. I was just answering your question and if you have another, I'll try to answer it too.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#189)
    by Alan on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:17:10 PM EST
    Lora posted:
    To revisit Ms. Arico, "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told." She is saying that there are injuries. Injuries that would be consistent with being choked, hit, kicked, and raped.
    She is not saying there are 'Injuries that would be consistent with being choked, hit, kicked, and raped'. She does not specify the story that the injuries are said to be consistent with. By some stories there was, for instance, no choking. In any case, Arico did not examine the AV, and she cannot provide original evidence.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#190)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:17:58 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    IMHO, why is it so hard for you to accept that one of the players probably ponied up $100 of the $400 total and was mad about losing it for a nonperformance. What makes you think everyone contributed equally? Maybe some of the guys didn't have any cash and maybe one guy had a hundred in his pocket and chipped in more than the others. What do you think that they passed a hat to 40 guys and everyone put a twenty in. Maybe most of them were flat broke.
    That's not at all hard for me to accept. I didn't realize that was what thinkandtype was suggesting. I took her "What if the $100 bucks was just whatever the unnamed theoretical player had thrown in as his share of payment for the night's entertainment" literally. I see it could mean what you said. I just like the $800.00 version better. That is what they paid and the attorneys said they were angry and felt ripped off. It goes with the sarcastic delivery , too. It's an idea that never occurred to me and I really like it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#191)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:21:55 PM EST
    IMHO,
    I have no idea if the accuser is lying about the Creedmoor incident if the mother is lying, if the father is lying, I'm just telling you what their story is so you know better than to assume,like Yale and Bob in Pacifica have, that since the father told the reporter "those boys didn't do nothing to her" that proves she filed a false police report, it doesn't.
    Is this how you say "uncle?"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#192)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:27:50 PM EST
    Alan posted:
    In any case, Arico did not examine the AV, and she cannot provide original evidence.
    Doctors that have never seen the patient in question can testify to the findings in the medical report. I wonder if any photographs were taken?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#193)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:32:46 PM EST
    IMHO wrote,
    Doctors that have never seen the patient in question can testify to the findings in the medical report.
    Not true. They can offer expert opinion based on findings in a medical report. In other words, they can rely on the findings of the examining doctor when forming their opinion about the medical condition presented. The cannot testify to the actual findings because they did not make them. There would be no foundation for this type of testimony.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#194)
    by Alan on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:47:07 PM EST
    imho posted:
    Doctors that have never seen the patient in question can testify to the findings in the medical report.
    A nurse is not the same as a doctor. An expert witness can offer opinions about medical findings, but that is not the same as 'can testify to the findings...' May I ask why you raise the issue of doctors in relation to a quote from a nurse?
    I wonder if any photographs were taken?
    Photographs of? Taken by? I may think I know what you mean but it's always best to get imhology clarified.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#195)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:51:39 PM EST
    Alan, I am unaware of the word "imhology." And, reference to m-w online yields no results. What does it mean?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#196)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 12:07:01 AM EST
    A point on prosody. "It's only a hundred dollars" would most likely be pronounced with a falling tone on "dollars" if what were meant were "that you've wasted by paying strippers too wasted to perform" and with a rising tone on "dollars" if what were meant were "that it would cost for sexual 'extras'". In the absence of an audio recording, it would be interesting to know what Bissey thought was meant. His interpretation would very likely be (unconsciously) influenced by the tone.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#197)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 12:15:52 AM EST
    Imhology is a rhetorical practice. Among its characteristics are:
    • repeating arguments over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over
    • adopting special meanings for a term in argument without declaring the special meaning
    • repeatedly posting the words '*gobble* *gobble*'
    The practice is sufficiently rare and eccentric that it is unclear if the neology of imhology will gain general currency.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#198)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 12:17:16 AM EST
    By "Any photographs?" what Alan meant was presumably "to document injuries". I don't suppose, however, that photos would be taken to document NON-injuries, and I doubt that the edema of the vaginal walls would show in photographs. (These are medical personel, so they wouldn't use "vagina" to mean "vulva", and they must be talking about something internal.) As for "get imhology clarified" what Alan must mean is "take precautions to reduce the possibility of quibbling". Look at the first four letters of the word.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#199)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 12:22:00 AM EST
    That's really funny. I totally missed it. I don't dare ask what "neology" is now.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#200)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 12:57:45 AM EST
    There's a really good article up by Cash Michaels in the Wilmington Journal. I don't know how to link it so maybe someone will help me out. I think it's notable because Cash Michaels has been one of the AV's supporters and a prominent member of the black community in the RDU area. He has something to do with the web site "ourheartsandminds" or something similar that is a religious support site for the alleged victim. From what little I have read, Cash seems like an honorable guy. This is a little snippet of the article that I find interesting. My comments in bold:
    So with the Durham District Attorney, Police Department, and the accuser all under withering attack, is there still a case, and will it go forth? Indeed, what do all of these defense motion disclosures really mean? While objective observers certainly agree that Nifong's case seems, at least in the "trial by media," to be clearly up against the ropes, there is much that many of his critics are clearly overlooking. Virtually all of the prosecution's evidentiary documents that the defense has now so skillfully revealed for maximum effect in the court of public opinion in recent days, in fact were derived from very early in the Durham police investigation. Indeed, much of it isn't new at all. Many of the issues and questions about credibility raised by police and prosecutors about the accuser and her story, as reflected in those documents, were part of the process to check out the validity of her account and background three months ago. In fact, the alleged victim told The News and Observer on March 25, her first and only interview, that she hesitated at first to report the alleged assault. "My father came to see me in the hospital," she told the paper. "I knew if I didn't report it that he would have that hurt forever, knowing that someone hurt his baby and got away with it." Durham police indicated that it took them 31 hours to secure a search warrant for 610 N. Buchanan Blvd, the site of the party, because the alleged victim was not immediately forthcoming with the details. In fact, virtually all of the discrepancies noted in those recent defense motions apparently were investigated and straightened out by the time Nifong began preparing his case to go before the grand jury to secure three indictments. I think Cash might be assuming a little much here. Clearly if he went with only what the defense has made public, no indictments would have been forthcoming, which means Nifong should have more than he has so far allowed to be revealed. Cash doesn't know the Grand Jury process. The above comment is pretty funny and damning really for Nifong when you think about it. It always amazes me how little people really know about today's grand juries and how captive they are to the prosecution. Regarding contradictions in what the medical exam after the alleged assault showed, a Durham police affidavit, a legal document, clearly indicates that a medical report on the accuser's injuries was subpoenaed from Duke Medical Center, and it showed "injuries consistent with being raped and sexually assaulted vaginally and anally." What report did investigators subpoena that defense attorneys apparently haven't seen?
    This is the best of all. What medical report was that? Cash Michaels wants to know and so do I because it clearly hasn't been seen yet.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#201)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 12:58:09 AM EST
    SharonInJax said:
    How do I feel about people who work for escort services? I pity the women and despise the men. How's that?
    That's ridiculous. Why should the women get a pass and the men the blame? And whatever the sins of the driver he hasn't falsely cried rape.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#202)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 01:16:47 AM EST
    Lora said:
    She is saying that there are injuries. Injuries that would be consistent with being choked, hit, kicked, and raped. As the head of the program, she wouldn't say there were injuries if there were no injuries. I'm betting that there were injuries and we will find that they were documented.
    I believe the defense has stated that the medical exam found that the AV had some scratches on her leg. Perhaps she had additional injuries but this can not be inferred from the "consistent with" statement.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#203)
    by JK on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 02:42:27 AM EST
    Newport said:
    At this point she doesn't deserve the "benefit of the doubt" because there is no doubt that she is a false accuser. None.
    At this point, based on the evidence we have seen, I think it is highly unlikely the AV is telling the truth. But you don't think there is room for any doubt at all? Certainly, the AV's stories have been very inconsistent. But some of those inconsistencies might be explained by (1) the trauma of being raped, and (2) intoxication. Even if she became intoxicated purely by her own decisions, that is not necessarily inconsistent with rape. And let's also assume that she misidentified her attackers - that doesn't mean no rape. Are you saying (a) there is no doubt that each of the three indicted players are innocent or (b) there is no doubt that none of the players raped her? Again, I think the likelihood that the AV was raped is very, very low (based on the evidence we now know). But keep in mind that (1) the defense has not released all of the evidence, and (2) Nifong may not have disclosed all of the evidence to the defense. Given that we know Nifong has already committed discovery violations, do you think it's impossible that he has any solid evidence that he has so far failed to produce? Maybe not very likely, but possible. BTW, someone here (I don't remember if it was you or someone else) said that certain talking heads have seen the entire file and have concluded that there is nothing compelling in it against the players. I am sorry, but I have very little confidence in reaching a conclusion based on some TH's assertions about the state of evidence that has not been publicly released.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#204)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 02:56:59 AM EST
    Jk,
    At this point, based on the evidence we have seen, I think it is highly unlikely the AV is telling the truth. But you don't think there is room for any doubt at all?
    I don't based on the totality of the circumstances including the total absense of DNA, the picture of the FA on the back porch trying to reenter the house after the rape was supposed to have occurred, the lack of any credibility of the complainant, and the complete absense of any injuries that support her claims. There is no doubt about the falsity of the charges. you further wrote,
    And let's also assume that she misidentified her attackers - that doesn't mean no rape. Are you saying (a) there is no doubt that each of the three indicted players are innocent or (b) there is no doubt that none of the players raped her?
    Both
    Given that we know Nifong has already committed discovery violations, do you think it's impossible that he has any solid evidence that he has so far failed to produce?
    He would have leaked it by now if he had anything, so he doesn't.
    BTW, someone here (I don't remember if it was you or someone else) said that certain talking heads have seen the entire file and have concluded that there is nothing compelling in it against the players. I am sorry, but I have very little confidence in reaching a conclusion based on some TH's assertions about the state of evidence that has not been publicly released.
    It was me that said this and the TH I was referring to was Abrams. Normally, I would agree with you but in this case I do trust Abrams. He is a smart guy and he has been the TH most in command of the facts.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#205)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:06:34 AM EST
    jk posted:
    But keep in mind that (1) the defense has not released all of the evidence, and (2) Nifong may not have disclosed all of the evidence to the defense.
    Nifong is required by law to give the defence all his evidence with some very lmited exceptions. Clearly at least some things are missing such as the statements of the other police involved on the night of the alleged offence and the records of the access centre. At some point Nifong's ability to introduce 'new' evidence is going to start getting very limited indeed. Trial by ambush is great TV but mythical law.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#206)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:10:02 AM EST
    JK, I should have also added the consistency of the boys' statements from day one, i.e., no rape occurred -- they never went for the consensual sex claim which would have been easy to do under the circumstances if they were guilty and thought their DNA might show up -- and the lack of any consciousness of guilt on their part, e.g., no hiding of evidence, offering to take polygraphs, giving voluntary statements, turning over evidence voluntarily etc.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#207)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:11:37 AM EST
    JK, One more thing: the lack of an outcry witness.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#208)
    by JK on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:13:15 AM EST
    IMHO, You asked about the portion of the motion relating to condoms. I think it can be looked at in two ways - first, how Nifong's statements about condoms relate to the relief sought (i.e., the technical legal issue) and second, how the statements relate to Nifong's credibility (i.e., beyond the legal issue, how the statements help color the judge's perceptions of the litigants and their counsel). In terms of the first issue, the argument goes like this: (1) The AV told Nurse Levicy in both the checklist interview and narrative interview that the rapists did not use condoms; (2) The DA made comments to the media suggesting that condom use was not only possible but probable*; (3) Therefore, Nifong must have relied on other interviews, reports, or statements by the witnesses that were not produced; (4) Therefore, Nifong should be required to produce these interviews, reports, or statements. *Nifong's statement in Charlotte Observer article, April 11, 2006:
    "I would not be surprised if condoms were used. . . . Probably an exotic dancer would not be your first choice for unprotected sex."
    Now, proposition (3) does not logically follow from propositions (1) and (2). However, if there are no other reports or statements in the file suggesting condom use, it makes Nifong's public comments seem very irresponsible. The purpose of the motion is to force Nifong to take a position - to either produce some evidence suggesting condom use, or to essentially admit that there is none, in which case his credibility is diminished. That goes to the second purpose. Regardless of whether Nifong actually is compelled to produce anything, the purpose of the motion is to shade the judge's perception of Nifong. Although the judge may not be the trial judge, he will still decide important pretrial motions. You earlier quoted the judge as saying:
    "I'm not going to sign an order allowing you to go rummage through all law enforcement records," he said. "I'm not going to order things that I believe will be done voluntarily."
    If the judge comes to believe Nifong is not on the up and up, he may change his mind about that. The supplemental motion specifically asks for an order allowing the defendant to personally review the entire file of the Durham Police Department.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#209)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:25:07 AM EST
    Nice post jk, you wrote,
    The purpose of the motion is to force Nifong to take a position - to either produce some evidence suggesting condom use, or to essentially admit that there is none, in which case his credibility is diminished.
    I would just add that not only would Nifong's credibility be reduced (if such a thing was possible at this point) but the possibility of a conviction would be reduced markedly because there would be no explanation for the lack of DNA evidence.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#210)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:25:25 AM EST
    If this case ever makes it to trial, Himan will be shredded. It won't be pretty.
    It's rather difficult to think of a prosecution witness who wouldn't be destroyed under cross exam by and competent lawyer. It would be child's play to take apart Kim's or the FA BS stories on the witness stand.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#211)
    by JK on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:27:41 AM EST
    Newport, I agree with most of what you are saying. I think where we disagree is the difference between "very little doubt" and "none at all." Until and unless the defense releases the entire file, I am unwilling to speak in such absolutes.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#212)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:32:58 AM EST
    jk, No worries, mate.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#213)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:58:39 AM EST
    "it's only a hundred dollors" perhaps should be correlated with the AV telling Kim she wanted to go back in the house because there was more money to be made inside. Of course, once the bathroom door closed and the words "Sweetheart, you can't leave" were uttered, the AV may have realized that the reason she was brought back inside was so that she could make less money, not more money. A "dusting up" I think is the way Talkleft originally put it. After that episode she became pretty much incoherent, right? Consistent with having been raped? Bob in P. wrote:
    Perhaps if PB were arrested for a crime she hadn't committed and had to go through the process she'd understand how her standard of justice would be better suited for a Kafka story than the U.S.
    I WAS arrested, falsely accused, and permanently tarnished by the experience. The well-heeled perpetrators formed a wall of silence and hid behind lying attorneys. Medical records were fabricated by lawyers and doctors to coverup their wrong-doing. So I know personally some of the techniques people use when threatened with prosecution. I think the accuser is quite fortunate to have Nifong on this case. Imagine if Orinoco had been Prosecutor... She'd be in jail right now and he'd be arguing that no sentence was harsh enough for her. Orinoco, By the way, glad to have you back. I liked you better unfiltered, but I understand. You don't want to upset the Mrs.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#214)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 04:30:49 AM EST
    PB wrote:
    Of course, once the bathroom door closed and the words "Sweetheart, you can't leave" were uttered...
    What is the evidence for those words being uttered? In the alternative, where in your remarks do you show the utterance of those words is just speculation?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#215)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:21:45 AM EST
    PB wrote,
    I WAS arrested, falsely accused, and permanently tarnished by the experience. The well-heeled perpetrators formed a wall of silence and hid behind lying attorneys. Medical records were fabricated by lawyers and doctors to coverup their wrong-doing. So I know personally some of the techniques people use when threatened with prosecution.
    I would think then that you might have a little more sympathy for the innocent here. But, alas, I guess not. Are you suggesting that medical records could be fabricated by the Duke boys here? Surely they were not in possession of them at any time? And since you think I'm someone who went by Orinco and I assure you I am not, what does this mean?
    Orinoco, By the way, glad to have you back. I liked you better unfiltered, but I understand
    Finally, PB, yes I think the FA should do some time. Not the 25-30 years the boys are facing but some serious time. Either in the state prison or a mental institute as the evidence warrants because she is a danger to herself, her children and every innocent person in Durham, NC. You, of all people, if what you say is true, should recognize that.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#216)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:25:51 AM EST
    PB, The FA was incoherent before she ever showed up at the house. See the statements of Jariel Johnson and Kim Pittman.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#217)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:30:00 AM EST
    PB, why would those boys rape the FA if they could just have her for $100 as you suggest. She was, after all, a prostitute and the Duke boys are rich. Why rape?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#218)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:44:07 AM EST
    From an upcoming Newsweek article Doubts About Duke:
    Asked for an interview last week by NEWSWEEK, Nifong declined, but sent an angry e-mail accusing the national media of getting spun by defense lawyers and sticking to his earlier comments to the press. "None of the 'facts' I know at this time, indeed, none of the evidence I have seen from any source, has changed the opinion that I expressed initially," he wrote. He lashed out at "media speculation" (adding, "and it is even worse on the blogs"). He said that he was bound by ethics rules against commenting any more about the case or evidence.
    A few things strike me about this. First, his wording makes it sound like he is the only decision-maker in this process. I generally think people should not make important decisions without having an independent voice to counsel them. Second, he seems angry at the blogs. As far as I know, this TalkLeft forum is the most prominent site for discussing the case. Has he been reading everything going on here? Third, it would be interesting to know what event made Mr. Nifong stop speaking to the press out of a sudden concern for "ethical" violations. He certainly was not shy during the first few weeks of the investigation.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#219)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:58:40 AM EST
    Marcus wrote,
    Second, he seems angry at the blogs. As far as I know, this TalkLeft forum is the most prominent site for discussing the case. Has he been reading everything going on here?
    Yes, as I speculated earlier, he is imho and he hates Duke. That is why he files no responses to motions. Too busy on TL.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#220)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 06:17:29 AM EST
    IMHO, You should read that Newsweek article that Marcus just posted. It is very instructive on all manner of topics we have been discussing including: the father and his statements, the number of men the FA had sex with prior to Duke engagement, Coleman, the question of what constitutes a filler, Nifong's character, the medical report and timing of its acquisition etc. Pretty much sums up the current state of things really well. Nifong will have a serious case of the "ass," as BIP would put it, when he reads that story. Makes him out to be the fool that he is.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#221)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 06:19:24 AM EST
    Should have said Joe Dirt prosecutor from Jerkwater.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#222)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 06:22:44 AM EST
    Interesting that the FA is missing. Her parents have not seen her for two weeks, don't know where she is, and are concerned. This is not good for getting the case dropped if Nifong can't find her either.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#223)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 06:22:48 AM EST
    Maybe Nifong is hoping to find some tips on presenting his case from reading TL?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#224)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 06:34:44 AM EST
    I'll give him some right now. Drop the case, apologize to everyone involved for what you have done and the damage you have caused. Admit that you are really not that bright and that you got in over your head because, damn it, you couldn't stand the thought of losing that big election to your arch enemy, Freda Black (whoever that is). Seek forgiveness from whatever god you pray too for your venality, and hatefulness in charging innocents when you knew they didn't do anything wrong; and slink away into the dust bin of infamy as that prosecutor from Durham who got too smart for his own britches.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#225)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 06:53:38 AM EST
    Some info on Joe Dirt: Dirt's stories include being born without the top of his skull, resulting in his mother covering it with a mullet wig which he had kept ever since; befriending a meteor (which turns out to be a piece of jettisoned excrement); working at the carnival; working as an alligator baiter; befriending a strange janitor called Clem (later Gert B. Frobe, wan't he Goldfinger?) on a witness re-location programme; and being held captive by serial killer 'Buffalo Bob' in a scene similar to The Silence of the Lambs.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#226)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:10:42 AM EST
    Newport, you said:
    There are a lot of Duke haters out there.
    I, personally, blame Dick Vitale.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#227)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:15:29 AM EST
    Sharon, Maybe Blakely was Nifong before she got banned? I thought she was imho's sock puppet but who knows now.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#228)
    by spartan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:19:54 AM EST
    MarcusCA, Good Newsweek recap of the case to date. Nothing terribly new except Nifong e-mail response. The AV is not to be found? I don't believe she is going to recant . I just think she is just going to disappear like she is doing now.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#229)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:26:35 AM EST
    Alan
    imho posted:
    Doctors that have never seen the patient in question can testify to the findings in the medical report.
    A nurse is not the same as a doctor. An expert witness can offer opinions about medical findings, but that is not the same as 'can testify to the findings...'
    May I ask why you raise the issue of doctors in relation to a quote from a nurse?
    Alan, I used "doctor" as an example of a medical professional, but S.A.N.E. nurses often make more effective EXPERT WITNESSES than doctors do in sexual assault cases.[see articles cited below] imho posted:
    I wonder if any photographs were taken?
    Photographs of? Taken by? I may think I know what you mean but it's always best to get imhology clarified.
    Photographs documenting injuries or lack thereof. There may be photos of the interior of the accuser's v@gina and the external genitalia. S.A.N.E. examiners/nurses are trained to accomplish this and many have access to the special equipmment used. If these photos exist they may show injuries the trainee did not recognize, but a qualified expert witness did. Ms. Arico may be relying on evidence the defense has neglected to leak. The media has described, from the "time-stamped photos," injuries on the accuser that we have not seen mentioned in the excerpts from the medical reports the defense attorneys have released. Serving as an expert witness in rape cases. Keen-Payne R. Harris College of Nursing, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth. This article describes the role of the nurse practitioner as an expert witness in rape cases. Specific components of preparation for testimony are discussed, including the collection of data and protection of evidence; protecting the chain of custody; and preparing for testimony before the trial. Testifying about physical findings is reviewed as well as the importance of communicating complex information in simple words. The nurse practitioner's role in offering expert opinion is discussed, and possible questions from the prosecutor and defense attorney are noted.
    Faster Medical Response to Rape Helps Victims and Prosecutors A SANE nurse completes about 80 hours of training and must maintain expertise with continued training and a minimum number of exams each year. In contrast, a typical emergency room doctor has little training in gathering forensic evidence and may complete only one or two such exams each year. The doctor is not only rushed and pressured but often ends up reading exam instructions as he or she goes along.
    And while many doctors wanted to avoid sexual assault evidentiary exams because they can lead to time-consuming court appearances, SANE nurses' job includes that of expert witness, and their experience gives them a distinct edge in that role.
    Mark Purcell, a detective in the Alexandria City Police Department, said most rape cases, especially those involving acquaintance rape, end up before a jury. SANE nurses' expert testimony carries a lot of weight, especially in acquaintance rape cases where subtle forensic evidence is often the only barrier between a her-word-against-his situation. "They make tremendous expert witnesses," he said. "They're very hard to impeach."
    Purcell, who along with his partner handles sexual assault cases for the city, said the Inova Fairfax Hospital SANE program has led to more rape convictions. First, he said, the sensitive treatment of victims gives them greater confidence in the system and increases the likelihood they'll cooperate in the investigation. Second, the evidence and expert testimony provides juries with stronger evidence to convict.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#230)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:27:23 AM EST
    Is Nifong reading the blogs? Yes, for crying out loud! Either personally or through abettors, I believe. Are we spinning our wheels to help an incompetent prosecutor build a case? Probably. Some member(s?) has a remarkable grasp of the "case" details, while continually pumping others to provide arguments one way or another. I am glad to see that more members are open to considering this. Please, if you want to consider this possibility, look back in the current page and the one previous to it. Check out the responses, the wording, the attitude behind the statements (that is difficult, but reading them again in a different can be revealing).

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#231)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:29:20 AM EST
    Er, that should be "reading them again the a different light"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#232)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:43:05 AM EST
    Newport posted:
    Yes, as I speculated earlier, he is imho and he hates Duke. That is why he files no responses to motions. Too busy on TL.
    Another poster,*wink* *wink*, named Orinoco, accused me of being in a same sex marriage with Mr. Nifong. Now you are speculating I am Mr. Nifong?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#233)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:49:11 AM EST
    Madison posted:
    Some member(s?) has a remarkable grasp of the "case" details, while continually pumping others to provide arguments one way or another.
    Bob in Pacifica?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#234)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:56:54 AM EST
    Ah, Durga, why waste your time vexing someone who has said she doesn't want to talk with you when there are so many of us with false dichotomy bubbles just waiting to be popped? And I thought you were going to let us know about whether or not you thought the AV was lying?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#235)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:58:29 AM EST
    Ok Durga, one more attempt at reasonable discourse. You asked me: Let me ask you a question, Sharon.
    What if your son was charged with rape. He says to you that one night he hired strippers, one being the alleged victim and says, "...but she was dancing provocatively, didn't bring a bodyguard, so therefore clearly didn't have common sense that it was an invitation for intercourse", what would you believe?
    First I would tell him what I have been saying to him ever since this case broke: I don't care if the AV was a stripper, I don't care if the AV was a prostitute. If anyone at that party had sex with her, without her consent, it is rape and they should be charged and prosecuted. I have said this to him on almost a weekly basis, Durga. But, to continue with your hypothetical, I would then hire the best defense attorney his father and I could afford. And, if all the prosecutor in the case had is what Nifong has in this case, I would expect an acquittal in the criminal case and no likelihood of a finding of responsibility in a civil case, either. I would then have my son put into some sort of serious therapy to try to correct what was so wrong inside him that would make him think that any woman, no matter what she was doing at the time, was there for him to abuse sexually. I would have him on his knees in church every Sunday praying for forgiveness, and I would be right there beside him, praying he found it. The problem I have with your question is it has nothing to do with what I was asking which was, using this case as we know it thus far, how would a parent of a son feel if he were charged with the rape that this AV has, at some point, alleged? Without a confession from anyone, as you posit in your post to me, and based only on what we've seen thus far.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#236)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 08:02:53 AM EST
    Couldn't help myself, Bob, I had to give it one more chance with Durga. There are attorneys who are confrontational, and the best of them become trial attorneys, litigators of some sort. Then there are attorneys who are more conciliatory, who try to reach compromise and consensus. That's the kind I am. My only real adversary is the IRS.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#237)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 08:09:21 AM EST
    Newport: Could be, I suppose. Nifong has to be doing something other than responding to defense motions. I found it interesting that the Newsweek article said:
    As required by North Carolina law, Nifong says he has turned over all the evidence in his possession, almost 1,300 pages, to the defense, and this week he is expected to turn over another batch of documents.
    This may be part of what Nifong is doing: if he turns over information that the defense sought in the motions, that is his response. It won't answer all the issues raised in their motions, but it should/might render at least some of them moot. Another thought on Nifong: maybe he mistook his former campaign manager for a defense attorney, and that's why he never returned her call(s) or met with her.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#238)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 08:21:27 AM EST
    Regarding IMHO's ability to cut and paste old posts regarding what the AV's father said about the 1993 rape: The central fact is that the father, when he was first on TV commenting on the 1993 rape (a few months ago), said that she hadn't been raped. A story floated after that (I believe by the mother but I'm sure) was that the mother and daughter lied to the AV so that he wouldn't be beaten up or killed by the three rapists. There is no explanation as to why these three men would have been beating the AV's father if they were in jail awaiting trial. So, if we believe the AV through her mother, we have the AV lying to her father about the 1993 gang rape. We also have the curious question as to why, if she didn't tell her father about the rape in 1993 for his protection because he was such a wimpy guy, why she would report the rape years later. Did the father start weightlifting in the interim? Don't think so. We also have the curious question as to why, after she took the effort to report the rape years later, she never followed through. If it were so important, so torturing her mind, how come after she showed up at the police station and reported it she never showed up in court to pursue the ca? There was a similar course of action by the AV with the charge of her estranged husband threatening (or attempting) murder against her. Filing charges and then not in any way pursuing them. Likewise, she had a similar difficulty when she filed charges that an employer failed to pay her. File and then walk away. Since none of us were at the alleged three-man gang rape in 1993 and none of us were present at the various conversations between the father, mother and the AV concerning this, we don't know who was lying when. Either the AV lied about the rape happening or she lied to her father about the rape not happening. She lied to the police about the rape happening, or she told the truth but then didn't pursue it. There is nothing in the story about the 1993 gang rape, in either case, to suggest that the AV should be relied upon to be a broker of unvarnished truth. Considering that all eyewitness testimony and physical evidence points in the opposite direction, at this late date only fools and imhologists cling to the 1993 gang rape story as anything other than another mark against the AV's crediblity.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#239)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 08:23:05 AM EST
    I apologize for taking so long to get back to this, Lora. I was distracted. Lora wrote:
    re: the SANE program and the vawnet link: [from the article (posted by Madison): However, such conclusions are tentative because most published studies have not included adequate methodological controls or comparisons to rigorously test the effectiveness of SANE programs] ... the comment about inadequate methodological controls are in reference to the studies, not the SANE program.
    You are correct, Lora, that it was the studies that were faulted for having inadequate methodological control. Yet I was not trying to be misleading; I failed to "connect the dots," as it were, for my argument. The studies were faulty. Ergo, we cannot rely on the findings of those particular studies (referred to by the authors) to tell us anything about the effectiveness of S.A.N.E. programs in 2004. You further quoted from the article (thank you):
    Also from the article: [Empirical studies that directly compare the evidence collected by SANE nurses and physicians on objective criteria would better inform the debate over whether nurses are competent medical forensic examiners.]
    The emphasis is mine. Since the authors suggest that empirical studies (based upon evidence scientifically obtained and evaluated according to acccepted standards) would better inform the debate, I have inferred that such studies had not been done as of 2004. Perhaps they have been done now or are underway. Perhaps we are not relying in criminal cases, after all, on medical testimony derived from a procedure which has not been proven to have probative value. Perhaps.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#240)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 08:37:10 AM EST
    From Newsweek, from the AV's parents: According to their lawyer, Mark Simeon, the accuser's parents have not heard from their daughter for weeks and are very concerned. Is she not answering her door? Her phone? Have they filed a missing persons report? Where are the children? Does Nifong know where she is? Maybe she'll turn up and report that she was kidnapped by aliens.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#241)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 08:42:22 AM EST
    Sharon, no problem. I'm just waiting for Durga to burst my false dichotomy bubble.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#242)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 08:54:49 AM EST
    Or maybe the AV is at the Betty Ford Clinic.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#243)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 09:23:29 AM EST
    Bob, I don't think the AV can afford the Betty. I've meant to post something before this about your comments re the AV's mental history. There are mental illnesses that would be extremely germane to her account of that evening. I don't know how many of the viewers of this board have ever dealt with someone suffering from a bi-polar disorder, but that is just one possible illness that would explain much of the AV's behavior, both that night and after. This is not a variation on the "nuts and sluts" defense to a rape charge, (i.e., any Accuser is either crazy or a "loose woman,") but rather drawn from some limited experience I have with a person who was bi-polar. The swing from the "manic" to the "depressive" is frightening to behold, and can happen in a heartbeat.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#244)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 09:38:36 AM EST
    SharonInJax
    There are mental illnesses that would be extremely germane to her account of that evening. I don't know how many of the viewers of this board have ever dealt with someone suffering from a bi-polar disorder, but that is just one possible illness that would explain much of the AV's behavior, both that night and after.
    I agree that the accuser's mental state could also have been a factor in how she has acted (It is for that reason I refer to her as the "accuser" with no modifier; yet I cannot bring myself to call her the "victim" without more evidence than her own account(s). I assume there is no reason why she would have been given an evaluation during the course of these proceedings, since she is the one making the accusation. What obligation do the police and other entities have to establish that she may not be credible because she has a mental illness?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#245)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 09:46:53 AM EST
    Madison posted:
    Perhaps we are not relying in criminal cases, after all, on medical testimony derived from a procedure which has not been proven to have probative value. Perhaps.
    What the studies do or do not prove can be debated, a more relevant question is "what is the impact of a S.A.N.E. nurse's expert testimony?"
    Mark Purcell, a detective in the Alexandria City Police Department, said most rape cases, especially those involving acquaintance rape, end up before a jury. SANE nurses' expert testimony carries a lot of weight, especially in acquaintance rape cases where subtle forensic evidence is often the only barrier between a her-word-against-his situation. "They make tremendous expert witnesses," he said. "They're very hard to impeach.
    Impact on Law Enforcement and Prosecution
    Prosecutors have found SANEs to be credible witnesses in court as a result of their extensive experience and expertise in conducting evidentiary exams. The Director of a Wisconsin SANE program reported that during a 3 1/2-year period, they had a 100-percent conviction rate in cases where a SANE testified at trial.38 Patricia A. Smith, Coordinator of the SART/SANE program in Palmer, Alaska, noted that SANEs also save money at prosecution because the strength of photographic evidence taken by SANEs promotes more plea bargains, thus saving the state the cost of a trial.
    I wonder if there is photographic evidence and that is what was the basis for Ms. Arico's opinion. I wonder if she has been qualified as an expert witness?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#246)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:00:54 AM EST
    Newport posted:
    IMHO,
    You should read that Newsweek article that Marcus just posted.
    The only new information I noticed was:
    According to their lawyer, Mark Simeon, the accuser's parents have not heard from their daughter for weeks and are very concerned.
    Mark Simeon also represented Ms. Pittman.
    "None of the 'facts' I know at this time, indeed, none of the evidence I have seen from any source, has changed the opinion that I expressed initially," he wrote. He lashed out at "media speculation" (adding, "and it is even worse on the blogs"). He said that he was bound by ethics rules against commenting any more about the case or evidence.
    Good news from the prosecution front.
    As required by North Carolina law, Nifong says he has turned over all the evidence in his possession, almost 1,300 pages, to the defense, and this week he is expected to turn over another batch of documents.
    If there is anything favorable to the prosecution's case in this new batch of documents, we aren't going to hear about it until trial.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#247)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:15:20 AM EST
    One more bit of information in that Newsweek article that I hadn't heard before:
    Evans has already started to pay a price in the real world. He was supposed to begin a good job after graduation, but the job offer was withdrawn.
    Didn't one of the Duke lacrosse fathers say hiring strippers was the preferred type of entertainment for Wall Street guys? That couldn't be what put them off. Maybe they questioned Evans' leadership skills.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#248)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:20:34 AM EST
    Nope. Looks like he's the right stuff, he just got himself entangled in this time consuming situation: Duke trio face agonizing wait
    David Evans, the senior co-captain who graduated from Duke University last month, recently lost a job with a top-flight Wall Street trading firm, said his attorney, Joseph B. Cheshire V of Raleigh. The firm withdrew the offer because company officials felt the demands of a criminal trial wouldn't give Evans, 23, time to complete their rigorous training course.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#249)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:29:56 AM EST
    imho posted:
    Alan, I used "doctor" as an example of a medical professional, but S.A.N.E. nurses often make more effective EXPERT WITNESSES than doctors do in sexual assault cases.
    Perhaps. In future, you might care to use medical professional' when you mean 'medical professional', 'doctor' when you mean 'doctor', and 'nurse' when you mean 'nurse'. After all, I am sure no-one wants a long imhology on doctors to discover you are actually speaking about nurses. I don't contest the skills of SANE practitioners. Despite that, the Arico statement is essentially meaningless until we know which of the AV's several stories she was relating to whatever knowledge she has of the AV's condition. To look at the context of the Arico statement:
    Theresa Arico is a sexual assault nurse examiner and coordinator of that program at Duke. She described the process as a comprehensive combination of interviews and physical examinations of the person making the sexual assault complaint. "You can say with a high degree of certainty that there was a certain amount of blunt force trauma present to create injury" by the physical examination, which uses a device called a colposcope to magnify a woman's internal parts where injuries consistent with a sexual assault would occur, Arico said. But sexual assault nurse examiners do not render an opinion on whether a rape has occurred. That is for the State Bureau of Investigation to determine through its forensic lab work. "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told," Arico said.
    The article is dated 31 March. The AV, by memory, did not disclose her actual sexual activity until after the second round of DNA results became available on 13 May. It would be interesting to hear from Arico after she learnt of the AV's sexual activity. But at least the article implies a colposcopy was taken. It would be interesting to know if the colposcopy results were in the incomplete portions of the SANE report given to the defence.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#250)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:30:25 AM EST
    This is absolutely true:
    Mark Purcell, a detective in the Alexandria City Police Department, said most rape cases, especially those involving acquaintance rape, end up before a jury. SANE nurses' expert testimony carries a lot of weight, especially in acquaintance rape cases where subtle forensic evidence is often the only barrier between a her-word-against-his situation. "They make tremendous expert witnesses," he said. "They're very hard to impeach.
    It is tragic for justice. It lends false credibility to an accuser who needn't be exposed to scrutiny by anyone. This also is true:
    Prosecutors have found SANEs to be credible witnesses in court as a result of their extensive experience and expertise in conducting evidentiary exams. The Director of a Wisconsin SANE program reported that during a 3 1/2-year period, they had a 100-percent conviction rate in cases where a SANE testified at trial.38 Patricia A. Smith, Coordinator of the SART/SANE program in Palmer, Alaska, noted that SANEs also save money at prosecution because the strength of photographic evidence taken by SANEs promotes more plea bargains, thus saving the state the cost of a trial.
    Does anyone think that such powerful testimony ought not to be evaluated on its merits as evidence? It is clear that prosecutors (ahem) like the results they get, but gee, doesn't it matter that the evidence may not be evidence? As to the strength of photographs, I am sure it is powerful (hence the high conviction/plea rate) when viewed by jurors who don't know what kind of photograph might be generated when a woman (as part of a blind study of the S.A.N.E. program) playing the role of a rape victim presents herself. What does the nurse write in her statement in that situation? What does the "area" look like after consentual sex takes place? After 1 hour? After 24 hours? After 2 days? I assume that photographs of the accuser's nether regions were produced as part of the exam. Why wouldn't they exist? They would then have had to be provided to the defense in discovery. If someone were wondering why then we haven't seen them splashed all over the internet, there are only two possibilities, as I see it. The defense has them and has not shown them so that they can be splahed all over the internet, or the prosecutor has retained them in violation of an order. I posit that that the defense has them.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#251)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:31:29 AM EST
    Duke trio face agonizing wait
    Collin Finnerty, 19, doesn't have a summer job and is staying at his parents' home in Garden City, N.Y., said his attorney, Wade Smith of Raleigh. Finnerty also is a rising junior who faces the most restrictive release conditions because of an unrelated assault case in Washington, D.C. Those conditions include a curfew from 9 p.m. until 6 a.m. and a prohibition against being anywhere -- public or private -- where alcohol is served or consumed.
    He can't go to a restaurant that serves beer? His parents can only serve alcohol from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. when he can be out of the house? It seems it would be easy to violate that condition and if he did it would be easy to catch him violating it, if someone were out to get him.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#252)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:31:56 AM EST
    I wrote:
    I posit that that the defense has them.
    I suppose I should add, or soon will.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#253)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:36:56 AM EST
    Madison posted:
    I assume that photographs of the accuser's nether regions were produced as part of the exam. Why wouldn't they exist? They would then have had to be provided to the defense in discovery.
    If someone were wondering why then we haven't seen them splashed all over the internet, there are only two possibilities, as I see it. The defense has them and has not shown them so that they can be splahed all over the internet, or the prosecutor has retained them in violation of an order. I posit that that the defense has them.
    I'm not wondering why they are not splashed over the internet, I'm wondering if there are photos on which Ms. Arico based her opinion.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#254)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:42:02 AM EST
    I have written before that somebody here may have a vested interest in the "case." It appears to be beyond argumentative. It appears to be personal. What could be the basis for the personal animus on display?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#255)
    by ding7777 on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:48:10 AM EST
    As required by North Carolina law, Nifong says he has turned over all the evidence in his possession, almost 1,300 pages, to the defense, and this week he is expected to turn over another batch of documents.
    If Nifong has aleady turned over all, then how can he turn over another batch?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#256)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:51:38 AM EST
    ding7777 wrote:
    If Nifong has aleady turned over all, then how can he turn over another batch?
    Beats me. I'm sure someone will tell us.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#257)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:52:49 AM EST
    ding7777 posted:
    If Nifong has aleady turned over all, then how can he turn over another batch?
    It all depends on what the meaning of all is.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#258)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:53:49 AM EST
    A network, a fund
    "This has been a tragedy that I guess has to go down as a lesson in life," said John Walsh Sr., 57, of Bethesda, Md., an administrator for a children's hospital. "We've all been hurt by the rush to judgment and the fact nobody's looking at the injustice of the thing."
    I thought he might have also mentioned lessons to be learned about the lack of good judgement by the players that planned the party and some of the party-goers that behaved so wretchedly.
    Parents of the players have established an e-mail network. They've also started a legal fund to help pay attorney's fees and other costs, Walsh said. To help raise money, fund organizers are selling royal blue plastic wristbands, said Sally Fogarty, mother of rising sophomore Gibbs Fogarty. Embossed on the front: "Duke Lacrosse 2006." On the back: "Innocent #6, #13, #45," the jersey numbers for Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann.
    Uh oh, Sharon, Sally's putting herself out there.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#259)
    by ding7777 on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:56:15 AM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion Did Nifong take a cheap shot at Precious?
    "I would not be surprised if condoms were used. . . . Probably an exotic dancer would not be your first choice for unprotected sex."


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#260)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:57:58 AM EST
    ding7777 posted:
    As required by North Carolina law, Nifong says he has turned over all the evidence in his possession, almost 1,300 pages, to the defense, and this week he is expected to turn over another batch of documents.
    If Nifong has aleady turned over all, then how can he turn over another batch?
    He could be expecting to come into possession of more evidence this week, which he will in turn pass on to the defense.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#261)
    by JK on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:59:42 AM EST
    Bob, You said:
    Likewise, she had a similar difficulty when she filed charges that an employer failed to pay her. File and then walk away.
    I don't remember this one. Do you (or does anyone) have a link?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#262)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:59:56 AM EST
    Like many here, I've had real strong doubts about Nifong. Since he hasn't said much lately, who knows what he is thinking. If Newsweek is reporting that he sent an "angry" email, "lashed out" at the media speculation and even complained about the blogs my fears are now even worse. It doesn't sound to me like the response of a fair-minded DA who is seeking the truth. An alternative I would expect from a more rational prosecuter would be something along the lines of "no comment" if he didn't have anything to say or "Not everything reported in the media is accurate" if he wanted to address that. I can't believe he is commenting on the blogs - you can find blogs with extremist positions on almost any issue that receives national press. When combined with the smirks at the previous hearings and the "they wouldn't want to go up against me, I wouldn't want to go up against me either" comments he 's made previously, it seems to me we have a petty little man with a huge ego, in over his head and backed into a corner. It scares me that this guy is in the position he is.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#263)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:12:07 AM EST
    Newport wrote:
    Nifong will have a serious case of the "ass," as BIP would put it, when he reads that story. Makes him out to be the fool that he is.
    Thanks, Newport. He already has quite a substantial one. Now where was I going with this? Oh, yes. In my humble opinion, Mr. Nifong does not care what you or anyone else says about this case and he does not care if 99% of the people here disagree with him. Those would be admirable traits in a DA who is credible. His words betray him. Then and now.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#264)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:14:16 AM EST
    Alan wrote:
    Nifong will have a serious case of the "ass," as BIP would put it, when he reads that story. Makes him out to be the fool that he is.
    Bring on the quibbler.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#265)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:15:26 AM EST
    I apologize Alan, for the wrong attribution above. That was Newport's statement.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#266)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:18:32 AM EST
    imho posted:
    He could be expecting to come into possession of more evidence this week, which he will in turn pass on to the defense.
    Are you suggesting the SANE report is not yet complete and will be given to the defence when it is? Perhaps the undisclosed earlier lineups are still being written up? Were these works-in-progress notified to the defence when Nifong handed over all sic the material? One reason that discovery is crucial to procedural fairness is that a document given to the other side cannot be altered later.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#267)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:21:05 AM EST
    Madison posted:
    I apologize Alan, for the wrong attribution above. That was Newport's statement.
    I am shocked you think I would ever write 'ass' when I meant 'arse'. I can distinguish a donkey from a derriere.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#268)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:25:37 AM EST
    ding7777 wrote: to inmyhumbleopinion Did Nifong take a cheap shot at Precious? "I would not be surprised if condoms were used. . . . Probably an exotic dancer would not be your first choice for unprotected sex."
    ding7777, that would be, "yes." This is the best quote so far for a campaign ad campaign against him. Read that again a few times. What does the DA bringing charges of charges of rape say about the accuser obliquely: she has something you could catch. That slipped out without his thinking it through, I bet. I think he wanted to make a suggestion about condoms to deflate expectations of positive DNA matches, expectations which he himself had inflated. Whoopsie.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#269)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:27:46 AM EST
    Alan wrote:
    I am shocked you think I would ever write 'ass' when I meant 'arse'. I can distinguish a donkey from a derriere.
    Yes, I should have known. Consider me chastised, mate.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread (none / 0) (#270)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:30:07 AM EST
    Time for a new thread. It's on today's Newsweek article and I added a note of my own on the medical report which I was tipped to by e-mail from a commenter here. Comments here are closing.