home

Suspended Duke Player Reinstated

Ryan McFaddan, the Duke lacrosse player who sent an offensive e-mail after the party at which the accuser says she was raped, has been reinstated. Details about the e-mail are here.

Also, the county commissioner pondering a run against DA Nifong has gathered the necessary signatures to make it onto the ballot.

< Trent Lott on Hamdan Decision | Police Chiefs Criticize Homeland Security >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#1)
    by james on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 11:22:20 PM EST
    The summary is that the player claims he was quoting from a movie when he made the comments. I'm rambling as I am up far too late given that I have to go to RDU (Raleigh-Durham airport) tommorow from here. Big drag, big big drag. At least I'll be skirting Durham in favor of the area north of it - the other route is slower and you get to see an 'inner city'. Nifong is going to have a wonderful time with 40 something people testifying for the defence - if they all have more or the less story - the number is not a given as the total # at the party is not known, just the # of lacrosse players. Following up on the player and the 40 some odd people in the house that night it's going to be interesting when they call these guys to the stand - at any frat party where there's strippers I would imagine that the guys are paying close attention to their whereabouts (like in a bathroom with three guys for example). Especially so if you've 'pitched in' for the performance. Cheeks is okay for a challenger but I would imagine he would lose. Note: Bail reduced on Finerty to 100k. (breaking sort of N&O)

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:24:27 AM EST
    lora posted:
    Localone I believe asked if there was any other kind of rape besides "forcible," and yes, in PA anyway, nonconsensual sexual intercourse is a 2nd degree felony. No force necessary. Person says no. That's where the injuries come in. If the victim has an injury, you can say force was used and it's 1st degree rape. Without an injury (or a weapon) how are you going to prove force? So you go to 2nd degree rape.
    The distinction seems to derive from the old idea that a woman was required to resist to her utmost lest her protests or struggles be seen as pro forma. This requirement being waived if the man threatened her with a deadly weapon as this would forfeit any claim on his part of consent. A jury might feel in some cases that a lack of injury raised a reasonable doubt that the woman had resisted to her utmost but I don't think this would always be true. Suppose the man had substantial injuries or suppose he had tricked the woman into some sort of restraint before he attacked her. Nor would a minor injury prove that the woman had resisted to her utmost. So I don't really see why forcible should mean causing injury.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:19:25 AM EST
    Of course there is a kind of rape other than forcible: statutory.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#4)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:33:50 AM EST
    Newport posted:
    fillin, how does Bunny Hole fit into all of that?
    fillin, you are correct re Angel's. I just checked Shelton's report. So Bunny Hole just have contractual relations with Angel's too.
    I haven't found one reference to the accuser working for Bunnyhole Entertainment that wasn't from a blog and every blog mention I've seen is unsourced.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#5)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:35:06 AM EST
    re Kim's/Jarriel's written statement I think both reports are well written - maybe too well written. On my own, I probably would have had misspelled words. Did the Investigator help Kim/Jarriel write it? Does the Investigator talk to the person first to get an outline in logical sequence? And then just hand the outline back to Kim/Jarriel to flush out?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#6)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:06:57 AM EST
    Why The Defendants In The Duke Lacrosse Rape Case Can - And Should - Sue Durham's District Attorney For Malicious Prosecution If They Are Acquitted [Pleases do not assume that my posting a link to an article is tantamount to an endorsement of the article. It is not.]

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:07:17 AM EST
    Maybe they could have Mr. Freakonomics as an expert witness: n the Duke lacrosse sexual assault case, the police made the 46 players come down to the police station to have their pictures taken. Then these 46 pictures were shown to the women who has accused the lacrosse players of sexually assaulting her. She was shown the pictures one-by-one. The three players that she positively identified were the fourth, fifth, and seventh pictures that she saw. These are the only three positive identifications that were made. Statistically this is quite strange. The chance of any one player being positively identified is 3/46, or about .065. I did the calculations, and if the order of the pictures was randomly chosen, the probability that 3 of the first 7 pictures would be positive identifications is less than 1 in 100.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#8)
    by cpinva on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:13:52 AM EST
    i think the e-mail is a classic example of where the term "sophomoric" was derived. were i considering a run agains mr. nifong, one of the first things i would do is find out how much this case has cost the taxpayers of durham so far, vs the probability of success at trial, given what we know. surely, some of those scarce, alllocable assets could have been used elsewhere in the local criminal justice system.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:26:42 AM EST
    Banco, You wrote:
    The three players that she positively identified were the fourth, fifth, and seventh pictures that she saw. These are the only three positive identifications that were made.
    Then you commented on how "statistically strange" this is. This points to the hazards of trying to work out sensational conclusions when you only have partial information. Finnerty, of course, was ID'd late in that particular lineup. And one of the the three people you mention did not actually get indicted. Whatever the particular explanation(s) might turn out to be for these discrepancies, we can all bank on the fact that the statistics you cite will play no role whatsoever in their formulation.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#10)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:32:35 AM EST
    ding7777 posted:
    I think both reports are well written - maybe too well written. On my own, I probably would have had misspelled words.
    Kim misspelled: proceeded [proceded] the first time, but got it right the second and third time received [recieved] the first time, but got it right the second time

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:36:19 AM EST
    Sorry PB I should have been more clear but I know Talkleft has weird rules about posting web links. I cut and pasted that from the author of freakonomics Steven D. Levitt's blog. He cites the motion to dismiss as his source.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:38:39 AM EST
    Of course it's not a motion to dismiss but he's an economist rather than a lawyer.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#13)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 05:01:02 AM EST
    banco55, Talk Left prefers we link to our source rather than quote long passages that take up bandwidth. PB's was pointing out that Mr. Freakonomics based his calculations on incorrect data. The the fourth, fifth, and seventh pictures were NOT the only three positive identifications that were made. #4 was not indicted and the accuser went on to identify #40, Collin Finnerty, who was.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#14)
    by cpinva on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 05:24:38 AM EST
    IMHO, i read the article from the link you cited. very interesting, and kind of along the lines i was thinking, except she neglected to mention criminal acts by prosecutors piercing the veil of sovereign immunity. the last time i checked, suborning perjury was a criminal offense. i could be wrong. also, some of the evidence she cites, as compelling, for the defense, isn't, by a long shot.: the cell phone calls could have been made by anyone, not just the owner. in the absence of of witnesses who will swear that's who they talked to, it bears little weight.; the atm records are, again, not conclusive, unless accompanied by time/date stamped photographs, showing the accused as the one using it.; the dorm entry records. again, not compelling in and of itself, unless accompanied by either time/date stamped photos, or eyewitnesses who can place the accused in the dorm at the time/date noted. the most compelling, at least for the moment, is the cab driver's eyewitness testimony, as to the whereabouts of the accused, and his records should support this.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#15)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 05:36:20 AM EST
    The Herald Sun June 29, 2006
    Meanwhile, a lacrosse hearing previously scheduled for Monday has been pushed back to the week of July 17 at the request of defense lawyers.
    [snip]
    Thomas said Thursday that he and other lawyers wanted Monday's hearing postponed because it conflicted with travel plans some had made for the Fourth of July holiday.
    "Mr. Nifong gave us only five working days' notice on that schedule," Thomas said. "We weren't consulted on the date, which was in the middle of what many consider to be a four-day holiday weekend."
    Just noticed this - From the Herald Sun June 8, 2006:
    The lawyers, Thomas Manning of Raleigh and Bob Ekstrand of Durham, representing lacrosse player Frederick Krom Jr., and Bill Thomas of Durham, representing Bruce Edward Thompson, asked a judge to quash two subpoenas issued by Nifong May 31.
    Bill Thomas represents Bret Thompsom, whose legal name must be Bruce EdwardThompson, thus the nickname Bret?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#16)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 05:52:34 AM EST
    cpinva posted:
    the last time i checked, suborning perjury was a criminal offense.
    Who are you talking about? cpinva posted:
    the cell phone calls could have been made by anyone, not just the owner. in the absence of of witnesses who will swear that's who they talked to, it bears little weight.;
    I agree. By the lengths of the calls and the number of redials, I doubt he spoke to anyone. He may have left messages. cpinva posted:
    the atm records are, again, not conclusive, unless accompanied by time/date stamped photographs, showing the accused as the one using it.;
    They have shown time/date stamped photographs of Seligmann using the ATM machine with the logo on the cab door in the background. cpinva posted:
    as the one the dorm entry records. again, not compelling in and of itself, unless accompanied by either time/date stamped photos, or eyewitnesses who can place the accused in the dorm at the time/date noted.
    The cab driver and the other passenger, Wellington, can say they saw him head to his dorm. I don't know if they saw him enter (Wellington lives in a different dorm). cpinva posted:
    the most compelling, at least for the moment, is the cab driver's eyewitness testimony, as to the whereabouts of the accused, and his records should support this.
    The part of the alibi that needs shoring up is the time between the dance stopping about 12:04 a.m.[according to the unverified time-stamped photos] and Wellington seeing Seligmann outside after 12:14 a.m.[Wellington says Seligmann told him he had called a cab]. This is also the time most of the calls were made. Kim may have still been in the bathroom during this period.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:57:10 AM EST
    Imho, you asked cpinva about suborning perjury. The aticle you linked earlier mentioned it:
    This is not defense "spin." And these facts strongly suggest that the accuser could well be lying - and thus that it might well be suborning perjury for the D.A. to put her on the stand.


    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#18)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:57:25 AM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion You don't know if Wellington talked Reade after 12:14am. Wellington could have talked to Reade before 12:14am. Wellington could have been talking to Reade (that's how he found out that "we were both tired from playing golf") when Reade was redialing his g/f. Its only after 12:14 that Reade told Wellington he called a cab.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:05:03 AM EST
    Finnerty's parents on NBC claim he was at a restaurant, have phone records, witnesses, and commercial receipt. Link

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#20)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:15:42 AM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion correction to my 1st sentence above - it should read You don't know if Wellington talked Reade only after 12:14am.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:16:40 AM EST
    Lora, I don't know Pa law, but in NC this is second degree rape, which of course was not the charge in this case. Second Degree Rape (14-27.3) A person is guilty of rape in the second degree if the person engages in vaginal intercourse with another person: By force and against the will of the other person; or ... Classification: Class C Felony (40 years and/or fine) There HAS to be force to have rape in NC---the test is conjunctive.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#22)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:25:02 AM EST
    ding7777 posted:
    to inmyhumbleopinion
    You don't know if Wellington talked Reade after 12:14am.
    Wellington could have talked to Reade before 12:14am.
    Wellington could have been talking to Reade (that's how he found out that "we were both tired from playing golf") when Reade was redialing his g/f.
    Its only after 12:14 that Reade told Wellington he called a cab
    From the sworn affidavit of Robert Wellington:
    2. I was at the lacrosse party at 61 0 N. Buchanan Blvd. in Durham, NC on March 13 running over to March 14, 2006. After the two women danced for a few minutes in the main livingroom, they then left the main living room.
    3. Shortly thereafter, I then left the residence through the back door and talked to Reade. As, I went out the back door, I did not see or hear anything unusual. Once outside, I saw Reade, who appeared normal in all respects. We were both tired from playing golf that afternoon, and we had practice the next day. In addition the dancers had stopped dancing and were obviously impaired when they left the main living room. Reade said he had just called a cab and asked if I wanted to leave with him.
    Where was Wellington at 12:14 a.m. when Seligmann was calling the cab? If he was standing there with Reade discussing golf and practice and watching him dial his girlfriend's number, why did Reade have to tell him he just called a cab?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:28:21 AM EST
    So, if Seligman's alibi holds up, and Finnerty's alibi holds up: so much for "100%" certainty derived from an extremely flawed id process, so much for justice in Durham County as long as Mike Nifong is calling the shots. How can anyone think that the rape(s) alleged by the AV happened at that house? Nifong's rush to indict, his refusal to meet with defense attorneys and their clients, his refusal to look at potential alibi evidence, his bunker mentality for the past few months . . . just wrong, and sadly I don't think he will suffer one-tenth of what he was put everyone - the players and their families, the AV and her family, the Durham community - through.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#24)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:32:30 AM EST
    imho concoted:
    If he was standing there with Reade discussing golf and practice and watching him dial his girlfriend's number, why did Reade have to tell him he just called a cab?
    Perhaps Wellington could not hear because of the noise level generated by Seligmann's participation in a vicious and violent sexual assault in the bathroom.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:36:58 AM EST
    Even so, imho, the "window of opportunity" that you described earlier is still in play, if the time stamps on the pictures are accurate. Assume for the sake of argument that they are, if not exactly correct, then within a minute or so, based on the corroboration of the wrist watches. So start at 12:03-12:05: We know, as much as we can know anything so far, that after the dancing stopped at approximately that time, Kim and the AV went into the bathroom, where Kim changed, and then left. That had to have taken a few minutes, woudn't it? That closes the window even more, to around 12:10. And you still have the call for the cab set at 12:14, and you have to get Seligman out of the bathroom, out of the house, and into the backyard to be there when Wellington comes out of the house. It is hard to imagine Seligman's alibi not holding up, and if Finnerty has similar such evidence, this case is beyond dead in the water, against anyone.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:37:44 AM EST
    Alan said:
    Perhaps Wellington could not hear because of the noise level generated by Seligmann's participation in a vicious and violent sexual assault in the bathroom.
    Absolutely. We just don't know.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#27)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:43:32 AM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion Because Wellington (if he heard any of the conversation) could only hear Seglimann's end of the converstion - I'll meet him at the "corner of Watts and Urbane" - so he told Wellington it was a call to a cab

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:44:47 AM EST
    MSNBC now teasing that they are about to show the Abrams' interview with the Finnerty's.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:44:58 AM EST
    Lora, to correct my previous post, unless there is mental incapacitation, etc, there has to be force in NC to have second degree rape. It would surprise me even in Pa if there weren't some requirement of force PlUS lack of consent in the standard second degree rape. That is in the situations where you're not talking about incapacitation. Otherwise there would be a lot rape charges filed under the statute.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#30)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:53:38 AM EST
    to SharonInJax re your post 12:03 timeline Kim says she changed in her car, but before that Kim does say both Kim and Precious were in the bathroom where Precious thought they could get more money while Precious was yelling at the guys who were knocking on the door - it still takes minutes off the window of opportunity

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#31)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:12:14 AM EST
    Oh, thanks fillintheblanks I did miss that.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#32)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:15:32 AM EST
    NBC INTERVIEW June 30, 2006 When asked by Abrams when they knew Collin could be in trouble: Mr. Finnerty: Two days before Easter we got a call from our lawyer saying that, for some unknown reason, he had found out that Collin was on a short list. He didn't know how short the list was. When asked by Abrams if they ever thought Collin could have been involved: Mrs. Finnerty: He's totally innocent. It's totally not Collin, anybody that knows Collin, he's a very gentle boy and it's not within his character at all. When asked by Abrams if Collin has an alibi: Mr. Finnerty: He does and a very good one. [He talks about their laywers not wanting to air the alibi in the media] Mr. Finnerty: Collin has taken and has passed, with flying colors, no surprise, a polygraph test. [mentions the lack of DNA] Mr. Finnerty: He has numerous eyewitnesses every step of the way every minute of the night. He has numerous phone calls around the time in question many incoming many outgoing He has receipts and he also swiped himself with his card back into his dorm. So his whereabouts are totally verified every minute of the night. [later in the interview] Mr. Finnerty: Collin does in fact have a lot of exculpatory evidence.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:17:13 AM EST
    Thanks for the correction, ding. I guess I was confusing the "changing into her outfit when they got there, to changing out before they left. But as you noted, there was some time spent by the AV in the bathroom, and Seligman's opportunity is smaller. I think Seligman's story will go something like this: The "dancing" (as Little Feat would call it, the "no pants dance") stopped and the women went into the bathroom. Seligman, after a couple minutes, realized that the show was over; he was tired and hungry; he was ready to leave. He said some "good byes" to his teammates and went out back where it was quieter. He called a cab, gathered Wellington, and left. Sounds so simple, doesn't it, and I think it will turn out to be so. To put him in that bathroom, doing what he is charged with doing, takes a contortion of rational thought.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:22:24 AM EST
    Interesting article this morning regarding the players' possibility of being able to sue Nifong. Link

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:22:36 AM EST
    Fiction has been described as "the willing suspension of disbelief." Let's all hope that the future jurors reject the fiction of Nifong's case against the Duke players. Maybe Mikey has a future as a novelist, which is lucky for him because his legal career could be circumscribed after this.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:25:00 AM EST
    Sorry, just catching up this morning and I just saw that IMHO already posted that article regarding the possibility of a lawsuit against Nifong.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#37)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:25:55 AM EST
    Mrs. Finnerty should not say:
    He's totally innocent. It's totally not Collin, anybody that knows Collin, he's a very gentle boy and it's not within his character at all.
    until she can explain how "a very gentle boy" was charged with assult in DC

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#38)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:29:09 AM EST
    ding7777 posted:
    until she can explain how "a very gentle boy" was charged with assult in DC
    *INDIGNATION ALERT* SHARON! HURRY! HURRY! ding7777 criticized a player's mother!

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#39)
    by Lora on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:35:38 AM EST
    Thanks, localone My understanding in PA is that "no means no" for 2nd degree rape. Proving that, however, would be very difficult. It would be "he said/she said," and how do you get past reasonable doubt? That's probably one reason why you don't get as many charges as you might think. Another reason is that if the perp denies the charge, the victim generally goes through hell (in terms of being called a liar, held in contempt, ostracized, denied support), and generally more hell than the perp, from the stories I've heard in class. Add that to the emotional struggle with dealing with the rape itself, and you have less charges filed. James B, I think it comes down to proof. How do you prove to a jury that someone was forcibly raped if there is no injury to show for it? If the woman was tricked, how do you prove it was a trick, and not consensual? I agree, the requirement of force or threat of serious injury or death is a holdover from less enlightened times, and in PA anyway (and I'm sure many other places) there seems to be an attempt to recognize that sex without consent is a crime regardless. But again, how on earth do you prove it? Same situation here. For those of us who can believe in the possibility of a rape at the party, we were told there was force, and that the AV struggled and fought back. How much force, and the extent of the struggle, is unknown. As Bob in P has frequently said, a violent, noisy 30-minute fight would seem impossible for no one to notice or for lots more evidence in the way of blood, scratches, etc not to have been collected and noted. Or, the fight part could have happened and been done with in a very short time. How long does it take to hit someone in the face and kick them a couple times? Could happen within 60 seconds (but it would seem like a LOT longer). Wouldn't have to leave any evidence beyond some bruising and/or swelling. Same with the choke hold. Maybe no bruising there. How much pressure would you need to apply to someone's windpipe before they were panicked and clawing to be free? Not very much. From what we've seen so far from the incomplete and contradictory medical reports, there don't officially seem to be many injuries. (I suspect there were more, the defense pictures alone showed what looked like blood and bruises, though from what source I don't know. You wouldn't get bruising one minute after falling...it would take a little more time. Wasn't blood reported on her thigh, though, from one of the pictures? Where on her thigh?) So although I think she had more injuries than we've seen from the leaks of the medical reports, lack of serious injuries doesn't necessarily mean a rape didn't occur. Just makes it way harder to prove. Photios, Yes, certainly statutory rape. I didn't mean to exclude it, so thanks.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:47:14 AM EST
    Lora, I can't see that PA has a second degree rape statute but I haven't looked very far. Here's the rape def. for first degree. Subchapter B. Definition Of Offenses § 3121. Rape. (a) Offense defined.--A person commits a felony of the first degree when he or she engages in sexual intercourse with a complainant: By forcible compulsion. By threat of forcible compulsion that would prevent resistance by a person of reasonable resolution. Who is unconscious or where the person knows that the complainant is unaware that the sexual intercourse is occurring. Where the person has substantially impaired the complainant's power to appraise or control his or her conduct by administering or employing, without the knowledge of the complainant, drugs, intoxicants or other means for the purpose of preventing resistance. Who suffers from a mental disability which renders the complainant incapable of consent. Who is less than 13 years of age. Unless I'm missing something, you gotta have proof of more than lack of consent unless you're disabled or course. What is your teacher's source?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:47:19 AM EST
    I don't know about NC law, but in California forcible rape means rape accomplished by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear or immediate and unlawful bodily injury. Restraint is also force.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:51:19 AM EST
    Dave Evans' bond was also just reduced this morning. Link Do any of the attorneys have thoughts on why Stevens has done this for the players? When in court, he seemed to be siding with Nifong over other matters. Does lowering the bond send any message of the direction of this case?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:53:08 AM EST
    From the Findlaw article linked to above:
    It seems impossible that not a single juror, among twelve, would find the evidence to raise a reasonable doubt.
    I don't think that sentence means what Joanna Spilbor thinks it means. That's what happens when you use too many negatives in a row.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#44)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:57:15 AM EST
    Lora You may be interested, for a comparative perspective, in s61J and s61JA of the New South Wales Crimes Act 1900. In 1989 we abolished the common law offence of rape and substituted the statutory offence of sexual assault. Note that if the fact situation in the Duke matter was as alleged by Nifong (and I think that's a huge if) the defendants would be facing life terms under S61JA(2). The penalty for a false accusation under s314 is 7 years. The penalty for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice under s319 is 14 years. The doctrine of prosecutorial immunity is unknown in Australian law.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#45)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:58:24 AM EST
    re Finnerty's assult charge from the Washington Blade
    "It was an argument between two young guys who were sizing each other up," she said. "Both sides had an equal portion of discussion, so we felt it wasn't specifically a hate crime. So we waived the option there."
    Sounds like the argument loser (Jeffrey Bloxsom ) pressed charges

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:58:46 AM EST
    Generally bond amounts are discretionary, but I think reduction does signal that the court is less concerned about the seriousness of the evidence supporting the charges given the course of events---not sure what the arguments were but the motions in the file tell a pretty compelling story and Stephens has presided over several portions of this case. Nifong would have had an opportunity to oppose but if he did, it wasn't convincing to Stephens, who again is a former Durham County DA. The bond amount too goes to likelihood of flight, which seems very low.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#47)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:02:27 AM EST
    Parents of Charged LAX Player Speak Out Pat posted:
    Finnerty's parents on NBC claim he was at a restaurant, have phone records, witnesses, and commercial receipt.
    In the interview I saw, his parents didn't say he was at a restaurant. This article on the interview doesn't say his parents said that, nor does the link Pat provided. This is how rumors get started.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#48)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:26:12 AM EST
    whatisthat posted:
    Do any of the attorneys have thoughts on why Stevens has done this for the players? When in court, he seemed to be siding with Nifong over other matters. Does lowering the bond send any message of the direction of this case?
    Did Nifong raise any objections to the bail reductions?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#49)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:29:08 AM EST
    D.C. assault trial for Duke player
    According to police reports, Finnerty, Dagnes and Bonnano punched and beat Jeff Bloxsom and Scott Herndon early on Nov. 5 after showering them with anti-gay remarks.
    Bloxsom, who is not gay, yelled back. The fight left Bloxsom with a bruised chin and busted lip.
    The case was suspended after Finnerty agreed to pay Bloxsom's medical bills, perform community service and stay out of trouble for six months.
    If convicted, Finnerty could be sentenced to up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.
    Finnerty is "a very gentle boy" and Bloxsom is a "the loser."

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#50)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:37:55 AM EST
    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#51)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:40:55 AM EST
    imho concocted:
    Finnerty is "a very gentle boy" and Bloxsom is a "the loser."
    Why is this an exception to the supreme imhological principle that we just don't know?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#52)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:44:28 AM EST
    imho concocted:
    Did Nifong raise any objections to the bail reductions?
    We just don't know.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:51:54 AM EST
    lol, alan. And, of course, we are all familiar with how accurate (1) police reports are, when the police are giving the alleged victim's side of the story alone; and (2) newspaper articles are all. The prosecutor's statement undercut the reporter's take on what happened. But then again, we just don't know enough about it, do we?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:55:13 AM EST
    localone: agreed, and the likelihood of flight increases with the likelihood of conviction. I think the reduction in the bonds is an indication of Stevens' perception of the strength of Nifong's case, based on the documents he has seen thus far.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#55)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:55:49 AM EST
    I wonder if it is true Finnerty agreed to pay Bloxsom's medical bills? If so, it must be a sign of his very gentle nature.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#56)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:58:17 AM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    I think the reduction in the bonds is an indication of Stevens' perception of the strength of Nifong's case, based on the documents he has seen thus far.
    Ah...and I was thinking it was the photo of Reade in a Santa hat.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:58:39 AM EST
    If Nifong didn't oppose the reductions, what does that say? That he needs the testimony of the defendants to come out his way, as with Kim and her bond reduction?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#58)
    by Lora on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:13:58 AM EST
    localone, Your post of the PA statute matches the one I posted a thread or two ago that I copied from the handout from class (I left out the 13 years of age part but it is also on my handout). Also from the handout: 3124 Sexual Assault Second Degree felony When that person engages in sexual intercourse or deviate sexual intercourse with a complainant without consent. I see it isn't called rape, it's called sexual assault. However, lack of consent is the only criteria.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:26:22 AM EST
    Lora, in NC second degree sexual assault, too, requires some degree of force or threat of force, or incapacitation. So the statute says it must be by force AND against the will of the victim. THe only difference in rape and sexual assault is the element of intercourse. NC's law is consistent with the general rule if memory serves from law school. Pa's law is very unusual and must produce some interesting cases.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#60)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:30:58 AM EST
    Lora wrote:
    we were told there was force, and that the AV struggled and fought back. How much force, and the extent of the struggle, is unknown.
    You mean, we have not been told how much force was used? Not so. According to the police affidavit, she was hit in the face, kicked, and strangled, and her arms and legs were restrained.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#61)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:38:06 AM EST
    About time someone said something on behalf of CF. His old school lawyer sure hasn't done anything to help. He's been worth about as much as a bucket of warm spit if you ask me.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#62)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:41:01 AM EST
    Republican lawyer fails to earn spot on ballot in Durham DA race
    Good news. Nothing good could have come from that. Nifong must be really on the red ass now.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:43:31 AM EST
    Newport, you forget that we don't get a vote on innocence or guilt, only the jury. It may be old school not to talk to the media about your evidence, but in this case it's brilliant. Why? Because the DA's unbelievably not looking at the exculpatory evidence that was offered up on a silver platter to him. Why should the attorney give him a face saving shot at their evidence in the newspapers?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#64)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:45:30 AM EST
    All the extended back-and-forth about whether a sex act can be rape if committed without physical force is beside the point. The AV alleged that a great deal of force was used in this case. That's her story, and so far she and her principal enabler, Mike Nifong, have stuck to it since the PD filed the subpoena request, back in March.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:13:52 AM EST
    localone, disagree respectfully. In this case public perception is more important than anything to counter the destruction to reputation that these boys would have otherwise undured were Nifong's charges unrebutted until the time of trial. Furthermore, I never said that CF had to lay out his alibi chapter and verse, just that his lawyer should have been doing something, e.g., filing motions, getting the truth out etc. Osborn has been the lawyer doing the heavy lifting in this case with a little assist from Cheshire. CF lawyer doesn't have to give up the alibi to get the truth out and attack the evidence.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:22:23 AM EST
    Further, at this point I'm not sure what good it is doing to hold back on CF's alibi. He either was there or he wasn't and he's going to have to disclose it soon enough anyway. The only reason I can think of for holding back is what T&T said re not getting in trouble with the DC court over alcohol.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#67)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:28:01 AM EST
    The parents of one of three Duke University men's lacrosse players charged with raping a woman at a team party said their son has evidence to prove his innocence and has passed a polygraph test indicating he didn't commit the crime. In an interview with NBC's "Today" that aired Friday, Kevin Finnerty would not reveal specifics of his son's alibi. But he mentioned the cell phone records of his son, Collin Finnerty, at the time in question and electronic records showing when his son returned to his dormitory that night.
    This is what I'm talking about. The lawyer should have put this information out, or the parents should have gotten it out awhile ago. Doesn't give up any specifics but gets the message out -- CF has an alibi and it's a good one. He's passed a polygraph test, etc. I wonder how much the parents had to fight the lawyer over doing the interview?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#68)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:28:52 AM EST
    I have a question for all of you lawyer-types. What is the purpose of filing a notice of alibi defense? Can you still use an alibi defense even if you don't file the notice? I'm curious if Osborn NEEDED to file or just wanted to get the info out into the public domain. Thanks.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#69)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:38:37 AM EST
    Imho, your post of 6:52 am was fair and reasonable and useful. What has gotten into you?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#70)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:39:47 AM EST
    Mik, as far as I know, you MUST file the notice if you want to present an alibi at trial.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#71)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:44:28 AM EST
    Newport posted:
    Further, at this point I'm not sure what good it is doing to hold back on CF's alibi.
    Have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. The "story" has been out there for a while - we've been talking about it here for a long time. Nifong has not put forth his theory of what happened that fits with the evidence that has been made public. Call me a skeptic, but I think that might be because he hasn't made it up, oops, I mean written it down yet. Given the way he has conducted himself so far on this case, I wouldn't be helping him in his new career as a writer. Laying out the entire defense case at this time can only help Nifong. That would probably matter less if we had a prosecutor with both honesty and integrity. The existence of those qualities in this case remains in doubt.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#72)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:47:41 AM EST
    Suborning perjury will never wash. Nifong's not going to tell her to lie on the stand. He thinks she's telling the truth that she was raped. She's a little mixed up on the details but that's just trauma etc. She can explain that away. Nifong's obviously misguided and has his head buried up his you know what but to suggest that he would knowingly encourage false testimony is going a bit far.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#73)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:51:56 AM EST
    Thomas said Thursday that he and other lawyers wanted Monday's hearing postponed because it conflicted with travel plans some had made for the Fourth of July holiday.
    Anybody think that date was an accident? The courthouse will be a ghost town on Monday. This case isn't being tried until next year. Just another example of what a jerk Nifong is.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:52:35 AM EST
    Newport. Public reputation, schmublic reputation. What does it matter whether all the details come out to people who won't be on the jury in June 2006 or dramatically in February 2007. There is a general story of an alibi, any difference in public perception as between now and the trial doesn't outweigh the prejudice to showing your hand. Who knows,if it comes out too early, Nifong might read this blog to find out what Imho would do to TRY shred the alibi evidence...Not to mention who knows what CF alibi witnesses could have their probations revoked in the meantime.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#75)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:54:18 AM EST
    SomeWhatChunky, You make much sense. However, and I hate starting a sentence with however, if Finnery can show he wasn't there between 12:05 and 12:31, what difference does it make re Nifong changing his ideas around? That is the window of opportunity for any rape, is it not. Even Houdini could not make the rape happen before 12:05 or after 12:31. I guess you would be worried about giving Nifong extra time to stand on the alibi witnesses like he did the poor cabbi and that is a valid consideration as is T&T's earlier comments re alcohol.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#76)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:59:00 AM EST
    Localone, can one not move to dismiss the indictment based on an alibi? That is yet another reason to present the alibi if it is iron clad. All I know localone is that if it was me that was charged with something I didn't do and my reputation was being savaged over it, I would want to get the truth out, and I suspect all these boys and their parents feel the same way.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#77)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:59:28 AM EST
    I rather think that holding back CF's alibi has been a wise choice for the exactly this reason: Newport writes:
    The only reason I can think of for holding back is what T&T said re not getting in trouble with the DC court over alcohol.
    All the media would report during the long lulls in the "rape case" would be how CF had violated his agreement, not just with respect to alcohol, but regarding the curfew. This case in DC really hasn't been given much attention so far, and from what I can tell, that's probably fitting. Besides, keeping the alibi close doesn't allow the Nifungus Amongus to shift his timeline (although how he could do that and keep Seligmann in is lost on me). I think it's great for their families that they have all received bail reduction. No way they're fleeing from this.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#78)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:01:47 PM EST
    Yeah, localone you might be right about Nifong reading imho to shred the alibi and the other stuff you said. But why can't CF move to dismiss based on the alibi and get this over with if he has a clear alibi?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#79)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:02:30 PM EST
    I didn't say false testimony. I'd use the word "speculative" which is what I meant when I meant by "making it up." As we are all aware, there is much we "just don't know." Nifong has shown a desire not to educate himself on "trivial" matters such as alibis - not meeting with the defense etc etc... Though from his comments, he does seem to be perusing the blogs so I'm sure he knows what's being talked about. Of course, none of that is "on the record" so he need not acknowledge it. If he can explain her inconsistencies (that's an understatement) in her story by the excuse of "truama" etc..., he can fill in the blanks pretty much as he pleases. I find it hard to imagine that he will not present his case to "work around" the facts that he knows that might show the players are innocent. I don't think an ethical prosecutor would do that. I don't share your view of his ethics given his conduct in this case so far. I feel he intentionally misled the court in the original warrants. I think he violated all the lineup procedures intentionally as well. I hope at some point he can find a way to exit gracefully, but if he can't I think he'll be looking to win - not discover the truth.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#80)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:06:15 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    Imho, your post of 6:52 am was fair and reasonable and useful. What has gotten into you?
    I thought I might get you to follow suit. It's working. Your 12:47 p.m. post came very, very, close:
    and has his head buried up his you know what
    Other than that phrase, it is an excellent post.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#81)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:16:53 PM EST
    Newport wrote:
    He thinks she's telling the truth that she was raped. [snip] Nifong's obviously misguided and has his head buried up his you know what but to suggest that he would knowingly encourage false testimony is going a bit far.
    I.e., you believe that Nifong is a nut or a dope rather than a scoundrel. I.e., you completely discount the possibility that he was motivated by a desire to maximize his share of the ballots cast by black voters. Newport, I hate to say this, but methinks you're being a little dopey, yourself, here. Are you medicating yourself to get an early start on the weekend, by any chance?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#82)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:17:18 PM EST
    Posted by Newport June 30, 2006 12:47 PM
    Suborning perjury will never wash. Nifong's not going to tell her to lie on the stand. He thinks she's telling the truth that she was raped. She's a little mixed up on the details but that's just trauma etc. She can explain that away. Nifong's obviously misguided [and has his head buried up his you know what] but to suggest that he would knowingly encourage false testimony is going a bit far.


    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#83)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:19:32 PM EST
    wumhenry posted:
    Newport, I hate to say this, but methinks you're being a little dopey, yourself, here. Are you medicating yourself to get an early start on the weekend, by any chance.
    He's bewitched.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#84)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:23:08 PM EST
    very good article of why liethong could & should be sued.... here

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#85)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:23:20 PM EST
    I agree with Newport that what the parents said today should have been put out there sooner.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#86)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:23:42 PM EST
    Wum, maybe, but it's too early out her to get medicated up yet. Maybe later. And, yes I am leaning toward the possibility that Nifong is a nut and a dope. I do think he just ain't too bright. I don't think the political motivation angle is the be all and end all. There is more to this than that.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#87)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:28:14 PM EST
    He does seem to have quite the fixation with Duke lacrosse. He's tried to charge everybody on that team he could, and still he's fishing, fishing.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#88)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:29:40 PM EST
    Let's not all trample each other in the rush to pat IMHO on the back for the 6:52 post. While I agree there was, for one brief moment in time, some improvement, there is a key conclusion in there which I think is wrong. IMHO posted:
    cpinva posted: the cell phone calls could have been made by anyone, not just the owner. in the absence of of witnesses who will swear that's who they talked to, it bears little weight.;
    I agree. By the lengths of the calls and the number of redials, I doubt he spoke to anyone. He may have left messages.
    I don't agree with the above conclusion at all. Message or no message, I think a reasonable person would conclude that Reade made those calls to his girlfriend. Just because it's "possible" to imagine an unlikely scenario doesn't mean it would be given equal weight with the more likely scenario or that the more likely scenario would be given little weight. While, given what we know, it is possible (others previously beat this one to death with some "creative" theories) Reade didn't make those calls, I think it is highly doubtful.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#89)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:31:55 PM EST
    SomeWhatChunky, your 1:02 post was not directed at me, was it?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#90)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:35:21 PM EST
    Maybe I just don't want to believe that anyone could be that dishonest and corrupt. I'd rather chalk it up to stupidity, it's also easier to prove up.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#91)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:44:03 PM EST
    Newport, Directed is a strong word. Usually, I only direct things at IMHO:) I posted the 1:02 post in response to what you wrote about "Suborning perjury." I don't think we have any real disagreement here - I'm just not willing to trust Nifong at all at this point. Though he may have been a fair guy in the past, this case is a long way from traffic court. I think he's in way over his head and backed into a corner. Couple that with a stubborn man who has to win an election and....

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#92)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:50:40 PM EST
    Since I have had my sense called into question let me say what I really think about Nifong. I do think he is dishonest and corrupt. I do think he is unethical for making the statements he has made and leaning on the cabbi. I do think he harbors some deep resentment against the Duke LAX team and Duke University in general. I do think he is a stupid, lazy and exceedingly stubborn man and that he suffers from "white guilt." I also do think he wanted to win the election against his arch enemy and it caused him to make statements that he ordinarily wouldn't make and he deserves to be condemned for that reason. But, all that being said, I do think he "believes" the FA despite all the reasons for not doing so. Maybe the FA in person comes off as incredibly sincere. I don't know because I haven't seen her. Some patheological liars come off as sincere. They are good at lying. Thus, I do not believe that he would be suborning perjury by the mere act of putting the FA on the stand. I further don't believe that he will tell her to lie. She can do that all by herself and doesn't need Nifong's encouragement.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#93)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:53:04 PM EST
    SomeWhatChunky, My post re suborning perjury was in response to the author of the article posted earlier. I was not suggesting that you thought Nifong was suborning perjury. I feel unfairly attacked, just kidding.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#94)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:54:27 PM EST
    Newport, I would think that unless you have some specific issue of law, (like statute of limitations, or lack of jurisdiction), that a motion to dismiss where there are factually competing claims (as in she said rape he said alibi) would not be made or granted. That's because the resolution depends in part on the credibility of the witnesses or the evidence, which it's the job of the jury to assess. On the other hand, prosecutorial misconduct might be a matter of law, and the taint of the bad photo id (and resulting fruit of the poisonous tree) might be grounds as well, as a matter of law. In this case, though, I want to meet the judge who would out and out dismiss the rape case without at least letting the DA put on evidence first.Medal of courage for him/her.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#95)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:56:55 PM EST
    Newport, My thoughts on stupidity -- I think it easy for anyone, no matter how intelligent they are, to do something stupid. Especially given the pressures of time and othe external forces (like an election). I said before I thought Nifong was in way over his head. To be fair, he hadn't performed on the national stage before. This case quickly became white-hot and I can uderstand how someone could act rashly or make mistakes under the glare of the spotlight. Anyone would probably feel the pressure to do something significant when the TV crews are following you as you head to the bathroom. At the beginning of this case, the public pressure to act and act quickly was intense. I am in no way implying that acting quickly was ever the thing a prosecutor should have done.... At some point, when you realize what you did is wrong, if you have the chance, a person who is honest and has integrity will do what they can to fix things. Especially when what you did is having a major negative impact on others. Either he doesn't realize what he did is wrong (draw your own conclusions as to intelligence), there is some key evidence "we just don't know", or he is dishonest and corrupt. I decided when, knowing he was looking to bring charges, he questioned why the players would even need lawyers.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#96)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:02:03 PM EST
    Newport, No problem. Thanks for clearing that up. I hope you appreciate me using the opportunity of a misunderstanding to "discuss" Nifong :) Thanks.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#97)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:02:39 PM EST
    I now distrust Nifong to the extent I wonder how accurate and complete the discovery is or ever will be. I can believe he fell for the accuser's story, despite the lack of enthusiasm on the part of the police department (or perhaps because of it), once he learned that semen had been found in the accuser, who denied having had sexual relations in the preceding days. He may have thought he had a strong case (that's the stupidity kicking in) and was able to dismiss inconsistencies by the kind of rationalizations we read here all the time. I just can't understand, though, once the first DNA results came back, how he believed the accuser after that point. I don't think he does. This "case" seems to be so much more about the DA's actions now than about anyone else's.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#98)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    I do -- and no hard feelings at all. I have really thick skin, don't even need the flame suit I hear mentioned on blogs.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#99)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:07:40 PM EST
    SomewhatChunky posted:
    Though he may have been a fair guy in the past, this case is a long way from traffic court.
    Nifong has, reportedly, tried over 300 felony cases, almost one quarter of which were murder cases. No one has said he is not a good trial attorney.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#100)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:10:30 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    But, all that being said, I do think he "believes" the FA despite all the reasons for not doing so.
    Maybe the FA in person comes off as incredibly sincere. I don't know because I haven't seen her. Some patheological liars come off as sincere. They are good at lying.
    Thus, I do not believe that he would be suborning perjury by the mere act of putting the FA on the stand. I further don't believe that he will tell her to lie. She can do that all by herself and doesn't need Nifong's encouragement.
    That's my boy.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#101)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:11:05 PM EST
    localone, is there no provision of the criminal law where the judge can find on an alibi that as a matter of law no reasonable jury could reject the facts which support the alibi? If not, then you are correct. And you are further correct that it would take courage for a judge to dismiss the case. I like judges that have courage and don't worry about political fallout from their decisions.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#102)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:15:39 PM EST
    GUNSHY posted;
    very good article of why liethong could & should be sued.... here
    From the case Spilbor cites BUCKLEY v. FITZSIMMONS
    We next consider petitioner's claims regarding Fitzsimmons' statements to the press. Petitioner alleged that, during the prosecutor's public announcement of the indictment, Fitzsimmons made false assertions that numerous pieces of evidence, including the bootprint evidence, tied Buckley to a burglary ring that committed the Nicarico murder.
    The only statements I recall Nifong making since there were any identified defendants or even named suspects were when he spoke of the letters he received from rape victims that had been afraid to speak out when they were victimized and this from the e-mail to Ms. Meadows that he publically released:
    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.
    As far as his infamous "hooligans" quote in the N & O March 28, 2006:
    I would like to think that somebody who was not in the bathroom has the human decency to call up and say, "What am I doing covering up for a bunch of hooligans?" I'd like to be able to think that there were some people in that house that were not involved in this and were as horrified by it as the rest of us are.
    Nifong's defense attorney could say, "Unless the complaintant is willing to stipulate that he was, in fact, in the bathroom with Ms.[redacted]. I don't see that he has any action against Mr. Nifong in relation to being called a "hooligan." ;)

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#103)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:18:06 PM EST
    You all are missing my point. Nifong "WANTS" to believe the FA very badly. Hence, he does.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#104)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:18:31 PM EST
    The Story of Nifong, yet to be written, is about a guy with some intelligence, some social consciousness, some ambition, but not enough of any of that to be the kind of success he wanted. Think about how thrilling it must have seemed to see the case of a lifetime walk in just before the election. Finally a chance to dispatch Freda to her own dramas, to look like a race neutral good guy in a town where that matters a whole lot. Wouldn't this case make up for years of pain about cancer, his relegation as a middle-aged man to traffic court in a dingy Durham Courthouse, the indignities he suffered as an assistant without the glam of his opponent disappear, at least until November? Then the rescue from all that arrives arrives in the report of swaggering white boys raping an NC Central student. The woman is personally compelling, he suspects inherent racism at work, being a Tarheel, he hates the Duke arrogance. When the suspects won't talk with him without lawyers, and the best lawyers in town at that, and he can turn any of them, his lifetime of resentment and "almost there" has its effect: he digs his heels in and goes for broke, hoping it will all fall into place before trial. When it doesn't the only way out is stubbornly through. The very mediocrity that gave rise to all the resentment and made him what he is is now the formula for his destruction. If only this were fiction.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#105)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:19:11 PM EST
    Why does he want to?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#106)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:21:01 PM EST
    IMHO serves up a softball. As IMHO has so often pointed out, defense attorneys can say anything. Doesn't make it true.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#107)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:30:51 PM EST
    Madison, I think he wants to believe her because of all of his internal feelings towards past uncorrected wrongs, race in America, his feelings of antipathy toward privileged white Duke students, standing up for the downtrodden etc. There may be more, I don't know his mind. It is very similar to how a parent would want to believe his or her child was telling the truth despite all indication to the contrary. He wants to believe the FA for the same reasons that others like Georgia Goslee, Cash Michaels, Victoria Peterson, IMHO, etc. want to believe the FA. It is a powerful emotion we are talking about here.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#108)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:31:05 PM EST
    localone, That is a very sad pathology. ...hoping it will all fall in place before trial? How can anyone delude himself that thoroughly? How does his "hatred" and resentment overcome his social consciousness, his sense of justice? And in this day when almost everybody is dumping on him, shouldn't he have figured out this case is a loser, turn it over to the AG or something! Jeez Louise, I can only conclude he is corrupt to the core to be holding on so long (read November). This will be his undoing. At such a cost!

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#109)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:34:52 PM EST
    Excellent post localone. You are on the money here. Just add me stuff about how he "wants" to believe the FA and we can turn it over to Hollywood for a movie. I do claim a percentage of the royalties for my addition.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#110)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:36:11 PM EST
    IMHO,
    Nifong has, reportedly, tried over 300 felony cases, almost one quarter of which were murder cases. No one has said he is not a good trial attorney.
    Nor did I. Why quote me and imply something I did not say?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#111)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:38:47 PM EST
    If that is the case, Newport, he is definitely in the wrong job. If he can't put some distance between his emotions and the facts, he is too dangerous to wield the amount of power that NC affords him. Cosmic justice my @ss. We deal with what's in front of us, today; the cosmos will take care of itself. (And of course you know this wasn't personal; you could be right, probably are about the "White Guilt")

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#112)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:40:17 PM EST
    IMHO, you're forgetting about other false comments that Nifong made pre-indictment. His claim about the use of condoms, one of the defendants choking the alleged victim, evidence of anal trauma, claiming to have read a medical report that hadn't been given to him yet. All of these things have now been shown to be untrue--and were known to him at the time, if he had actually looked at the records. She insisted no condoms were used. She claimed no one had choked her. The medical report showed no injuries, just vaginal wall swelling. He hadn't see the medical record he claimed to have seen. All of these issues fed into the public hysteria about the case and still figure prominently in people's minds, causing confusion about the actuall facts and definitely painting a false picture of the defendants--even if they hadn't been named yet. The hooligans comment was just one more problematic statement in a string of problematic statement by an irresponsible DA.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#113)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:40:32 PM EST
    Newport, you're on. I will just say for the record that the real Freda Black is too much for fiction, she might have to be toned down. FA must evoke someone from Nifong's past. Who plays Nifong, do you think?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#114)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:44:51 PM EST
    Could someone send Nifong an email and tell him not to miss today's TL? I know he reads the blogs, but it is a long weekend and he might miss this one.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#115)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:46:15 PM EST
    If that is the case, Newport, he is definitely in the wrong job. If he can't put some distance between his emotions and the facts, he is too dangerous to wield the amount of power that NC affords him.
    Absolutely. And that is the problem here. He has buried his head in the sand to avoid learning the true facts just like many other emotionally involved people would do. How many times do we know of a parent "not looking" where all reason indicates they should look to avoid learning facts that would counter their perceptions of a child? Happpens all the time. Nifong might make a good victims advocate but he is a disaster as a district attorney. Flame suit off.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#116)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:49:12 PM EST
    Kevin Costner no doubt. He was convincing as Garrison in JFK.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#117)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:06:57 PM EST
    SomeWhatChunky,
    I don't share your view of his ethics given his conduct in this case so far. I feel he intentionally misled the court in the original warrants. I think he violated all the lineup procedures intentionally as well. I hope at some point he can find a way to exit gracefully, but if he can't I think he'll be looking to win - not discover the truth.
    Somewhat, I never said he was an ethical prosecutor. I have said just the opposite on many occasions. I think I have been in the vanguard on pointing out just how unethical he has been. I agree with everything else in your post. I just don't think he will be suborning perjury which is a mighty big step up from having a lack of ethics. Ethics violations get one censured, suspended or, if really serious, disbarred. Suborning perjury leads one to a lengthy prison sentence in a nasty lonely cage. And not even Nifong is stupid enough to risk that.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#118)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:16:50 PM EST
    Please, will someone get this blog over to Nifong. It would be too funny, especially the part about "his story" and people beating me over the head for "defending" Nifong.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#119)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:19:17 PM EST
    Newport, Sounds like, as usual, we agree. I misinterpreted your "Suborning perjury" comment as you being softer on Nifong than you are. Since you're not IMHO, I didn't parse your comment word for word. My bad - sorry about that.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#120)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:27:31 PM EST
    localone:
    I will just say for the record that the real Freda Black is too much for fiction, she might have to be toned down.
    Anyone see Jean-Xavier de Lestrade's documentary The Staircase? Freda Black stold the show: "he's a biiiiiii-sex-u-alll!"

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#121)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:28:27 PM EST
    localone:
    Who plays Nifong, do you think?
    I think this would be a made for TV movie, so I'll go with John Larroquette. You've got to factor in that his hair is perfect, and he has already shown the ability to play a smarmy prosecutor in a wacky court system.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#122)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:33:59 PM EST
    SomewhatChunky posted:
    Nor did I. Why quote me and imply something I did not say?
    What did I imply? Were you implying anything with your "Though he may have been a fair guy in the past, this case is a long way from traffic court" comment?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#123)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:34:28 PM EST
    Wouldn't Nick Nolte make a good Nifong? What is Clinton's old lawyer's, whatever his name is, role in the defense? Could he be orchestrating the 3 or more legal teams? Newport - referring back to much earlier posts re: CF's attorney, I can see your point, as well as SomewhatChunky's and localone's. You stated that the primary goal was to salvage their reputations in the public eye, but isn't the imperative goal to keep them from getting convicted? If the defense effort is indeed being coordinated, I would think that the repair of reputation would be a good secondary goal.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#124)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:41:14 PM EST
    Or Gary Busey as DA Mike Nifong?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#125)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:41:15 PM EST
    From "Rumor" central: For those who were unable to see the Abrams report - the interview with the Finnerty parents revealed the following: 1. CF has commercial receipts regarding his whereabouts on 3/13 and 3/14. 2. CF has incoming and outgoing cell phone calls. 3. CF has witnesses who will testify to his whereabouts throughout the evening. 4. CF passed a lie-detector test. The parents were reluctant to discuss the precise details, but the mother corrected a statement by the father regarding the timing of CF's arrival - he said CF saw the strippers arrive and depart - she said that wasn't correct - that CF was late to the party (thus, it's not clear from the interview which "arrival" CF saw). The point is that it appears that the overlap in time for CF and RS is relatively short - and may be a null set (depending upon which arrival he saw).

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#126)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:43:05 PM EST
    Oh my God, what a stupid I am.* Jack Nicholson would have to play Nifong based on his wonderful performances in "A Few Good Men," and "One Flew Over the Coocoo's Nest." * Famous quote of famous Argentine golfer Roberto De Vicenzo after being disqualified at the 1968 Masters. In what would become perhaps the most famous mistake in golf history, De Vicenzo failed to record his scores correctly and was disqualified for that reason. If he had recorded his scores correctly he would have tied for the lead and been in a playoff. Instead, he lost.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#127)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:43:29 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    He wants to believe the FA for the same reasons that others like Georgia Goslee, Cash Michaels, Victoria Peterson, IMHO, etc. want to believe the FA. It is a powerful emotion we are talking about here.
    There is a difference between wanting to believe something and not disbelieving something before you have heard it directly from the person telling it under conditions where her story can be fairly told and fairly challenged. I don't want her story to be true. I don't want her to have been attacked. I don't want these young men to have done that to anyone. Why would I?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#128)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:45:20 PM EST
    Madison posted:
    All the media would report during the long lulls in the "rape case" would be how CF had violated his agreement, not just with respect to alcohol, but regarding the curfew.
    Finnerty was not under a court ordered curfew at the time of the Duke lacrosse team party. Nothing the parents said put him at the party or near any alcohol consumption. The alibi receipts may. Madison posted:
    This case in DC really hasn't been given much attention so far, and from what I can tell, that's probably fitting.
    I wouldn't underestimate the seriousness of Finnerty's D.C. case. Diversion programs aren't as readily available for crimes against persons. Exceptions can be made for first time offenders. It's too bad that deal went south. I don't think there is a question that he's going to be convicted. Bloxsom has a witness, medical bills that probably document injuries, Finnerty's witnesses may be in a position where they have to take the fifth to avoid incriminating themselves. The question will be the sentence. I would guess he gets probation, but if he screws that up [pretty easy to do if you are an underaged college student who likes to party], he'll go to jail. Duke Athlete to Stand Trial in Georgetown Beating
    Finnerty, 19, could face up to six months in jail on the charge in the District. The charging documents quote the victim as saying that Finnerty and two other men accosted him early Nov. 5 on Wisconsin Avenue NW after calling him gay and making derogatory remarks.
    Bayly allowed Finnerty, from Garden City, N.Y., to be released on his own recognizance. But he placed new conditions on Finnerty and his two co-defendants. They must abide by a 9 p.m. curfew, contact court officials weekly and stay away from alcohol. If they violate the conditions, Bayly said, he would not hesitate to put them in the D.C. jail or a halfway house.
    This part was weird:
    Codefendants Patrick Bonanno and Daniel D'Agnes will not be tried - their previous agreements stand - but the judge modified their curfew. Despite arguments from defense lawyers that they had "absolutely nothing to do with anything that happened in North Carolina," the judge said they, along with Finnerty, had to remain in their homes between 9 p.m. and 6 a.m.
    The judge also told the three defendants they had to avoid places where alcohol is consumed and to stay away from the alleged victim.
    What's up with that?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#129)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:55:03 PM EST
    I wouldn't be so sure that CF will be convicted of anything. He might have a perfectly good self-defense claim. We should not jump to conclusions that he just pounded this guy from out of the blue. There's a history there. I think the story is that the guy kept harassing him in the bar.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#130)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:59:09 PM EST
    Thanks Pat. Pat posted:
    The parents were reluctant to discuss the precise details, but the mother corrected a statement by the father regarding the timing of CF's arrival - he said CF saw the strippers arrive and depart - she said that wasn't correct - that CF was late to the party (thus, it's not clear from the interview which "arrival" CF saw). The point is that it appears that the overlap in time for CF and RS is relatively short - and may be a null set (depending upon which arrival he saw).
    They should have stuck to what they said on the interview I saw.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#131)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:59:28 PM EST
    to Madison at June 30, 2006 02:02 PM I agree with what you said above. Nifong knew he hyped the racial aspect and helped created what Cheshire called the "fractionalization" of the races. I think that's why after the DNA test did not support his theory, he suggested a condom may have been used even though he knew the AV said no condom was used. There was just no way to undo the "fractionalization" he directly created.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#132)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 02:59:41 PM EST
    Sundance, yes, of course. I just disagree with CF's attorneys' failure to take a more public role in his defense. I feel the other two sets of lawyers have done a much better job on both fronts.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#133)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:02:14 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    There's a history there. I think the story is that the guy kept harassing him in the bar.
    Harassing is one thing, slugging a guy in the face is another. All three codefendants took the deal. I haven't read about any counter charges being filed. I think he is "going down."

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#134)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:03:51 PM EST
    IMHO said,
    They should have stuck to what they said on the interview I saw.
    Yes, and this just further demonstrates my point re CF's lawyers. He should be out there defending his client and not letting the parents on TV to potentially screw stuff up. If he doesn't like talking, he should file some motion outlining the basic alibi facts (no detail) to get the story out like the other lawyers did.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#135)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:06:57 PM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion
    Bloxsom has a witness,
    or Scott Herndon was also a participant - but decided not to press charges. Looking back, CF probably would have been better off to fight Bloxsom's claim and face the underage drinking charge

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#136)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:07:13 PM EST
    What in the world would counter charges have to do with anything? You don't know one bit of the evidence about what happened on the street. It was a fight like the fights that happen every single night on the streets around Georgetown when the bars empty out at 2 am. Maybe the other guy did something verbally or otherwise to cause CF to strike. That is self-defense and the fact that the other two or three may have taken pleas is absolutely meaningless.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#137)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:11:28 PM EST
    IMHO - you may be right about the eventual outcome, but I hope not. This kind of stuff happens all the time. A bunch of guys in a bar getting a little liquored up. Someone tweaks another's ego, real or imagined, retaliation and escalation, talking smack, some pushing, a few punches, everyone goes away. If the guys lived near each other, they might've ended up being good friends (guys are like that). It's very rare, unless one guy gets really injured, to file charges afterwards.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#138)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:14:46 PM EST
    Absolutely right Sundance. This Bloxsum or whoever sounds like a real sore loser or a punk or both. You'd sure as heck think he'd drop it after CF's Durham troubles. Even Bloxsum's parents wanted him to drop it.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#139)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:17:07 PM EST
    This Boxum was probably talking slick and it escalated from there.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#140)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:19:52 PM EST
    localone:
    The very mediocrity that gave rise to all the resentment and made him what he is is now the formula for his destruction.
    Whether he'll suffer anything like destruction remains to be seen. It seems very likely that this will end up with a split jury, leaving the defendants under a permanent cloud, and that Nifong will skate.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#141)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:22:14 PM EST
    Unfortunately, if the FA can be found and made to testify and Cheek loses or decides not to run, WumHenry is right.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#142)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:24:13 PM EST
    wumhenry - why do you expect a split jury?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#143)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:24:49 PM EST
    I don't want her story to be true. I don't want her to have been attacked. I don't want these young men to have done that to anyone. Why would I?
    So you could say "I told you so! You shouldn't have been so quick to conclude that the AV was lying."

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#144)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:30:20 PM EST
    I'll tell you why there is going to be a split jury. Because there will be at least 6 African Americans on that jury, a significant enough group that they will not be overwelmed by argument from the other side. The foreman may even be AA. This is not going to be a jury where one or two holdouts gives up because they feel outnumbered and overwhelmed by the others. The AA members of the jury will be in great enough numbers to form a strong block that will have its own dynamic of support and mutual reinforcement. This will lead to a hung jury. Anything who thinks otherwise is smoking something.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#145)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:33:39 PM EST
    Now I'm going to go get that medication that Wumhenry thought I might be already taking.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#146)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:36:36 PM EST
    wumhenry - why do you expect a split jury?
    Because it appears from all reported indications that prejudice against the accused runs very high in Durham's black community. A black juror who became convinced of the defendants' innocence from evidence presented at trial might well have reason to fear that he'd be outed and vilified if he were to vote for acquittal.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#147)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:37:42 PM EST
    I.e., what Newport said.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#148)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:42:57 PM EST
    And that's why I totally disagree with those who say "let it go to a jury; the defendants have nothing to fear if they're really innocent."

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#149)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:43:21 PM EST
    And don't think that Nifong doesn't know the foregoing, which makes him even more despicable, in my humble opinion.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#150)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:44:20 PM EST
    Yep.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#151)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:46:07 PM EST
    imho concoCTED:
    The only statements I recall Nifong making since there were any identified defendants or even named suspects...
    Nice try, but once Nifong identified the Lacrosse players as rapists they were accused. You are, however, to be congratulated for trying to revive your accused=indicted argument from a few threads ago.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#152)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:46:12 PM EST
    So if any of the Duke three or loved ones are reading this, you better get on your lawyers to get some motions heard somehow, someway. If you have to demand hearings, beg for hearings, plead for hearings, you do it.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#153)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:50:35 PM EST
    Let me revise my comments just slightly. I do believe that Seligman would be acquited at trial no matter the jury because his alibi is so strong, but the other two would get hung. The fingernail, if admitted, WILL be very important to that jury.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#154)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:58:39 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    And don't think that Nifong doesn't know the foregoing, which makes him even more despicable, in my humble opinion.
    And don't think that believing the complainant means Nifong then has the right to pursue convictions by any means necessary. Incidentally, the imhological interpretation of Buckley v. Fitzsimmons may give the impression that (1) prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity for statements at press conferences or (2) the Nifong invention about silence from the time of identification of the defendants has some validity. Neither proposition could be further from the truth.
    The functional approach of Imbler, which conforms to the common law theory, leads us to the same conclusion. Comments to the media have no functional tie to the judicial process just because they are made by a prosecutor. At the [509 U.S. 259, 278] press conference, Fitzsimmons did not act in "`his role as advocate for the State,'" Burns v. Reed, supra, 500 U.S., at 500 U.S., 491, quoting Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S., at 431 , n. 33. The conduct of a press conference does not involve the initiation of a prosecution, the presentation of the state's case in court, or actions preparatory for these functions. Statements to the press may be an integral part of a prosecutor's job, see National District Attorneys Assn., National Prosecution Standards 107, 110 (2d ed. 1991), and they may serve a vital public function. But in these respects, a prosecutor is in no different position than other executive officials who deal with the press, and, as noted above, supra, at 268, 277, qualified immunity is the norm for them.
    Absolute prosecutorial immunity is affirmed nowhere in Fitzsimmons. The time of identification theory appears nowhere in Fitzsimmons.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#155)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:05:33 PM EST
    Alan, Nifong said on national TV that if he believed the accuser that he was duty bound to pursue the case and that was what he was going to do. I don't know the ethical rule he was referring to, maybe someone else does.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#156)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:07:00 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    Let me revise my comments just slightly. I do believe that Seligman would be acquited at trial no matter the jury because his alibi is so strong, but the other two would get hung. The fingernail, if admitted, WILL be very important to that jury.
    Whether the nail becomes important depends on a number of factors - if the AV had newly painted nails then it will be irrelevant. Supposedly, the defense has pictures of the newly painted nails, and the SANE nurse should have observed their status. I doubt that any statement by the SANE nurse was made in the report - it's something that would come out in testimony. However, there may be pictures by the SANE nurse (though, not likely of the hands).

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#157)
    by january on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:17:22 PM EST
    Noname: John Larroquette. Sheer genius! You guys have kept me laughing all day today, except localone with his eloquent Story of Nifong, which almost made me cry. Does anyone here think that if this case gets to trial, maybe it's a GOOD think it won't be for a year? Maybe things will have cooled off enough for jurors not to be afraid to vote honestly? I hope it never gets that far, but if it does, maybe the time distance isn't all bad?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#158)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:22:06 PM EST
    Pat, was the recovered nail unpainted?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#159)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:25:55 PM EST
    Pat, I think I see what you are saying. So now we are going to have a paint drying expert to testify as to when the nails were painted? Don't get me wrong, I think the nail is a red herring and should be excluded because it doesn't prove anything etc. I am only saying that the Nail WILL be important to the jury, which will not understand or buy the scientific arguments many of us have been making here.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#160)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:30:30 PM EST
    And the "special towel" will be important as well.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#161)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:50:00 PM EST
    Newport: A couple of things. The players asserted that the AV was painting her nails while she locked herself in the bathroom. The defense has pictures of the AV during the dance (with some missing fake nails) and unpainted real nails. After the dance, on the way out of the house, I believe the defense has pictures that suggests that her nails have now been painted. This would support the players assertion and cast doubt on a rape charge - if the nails were painted early on - then Seligmann is definitely out - and painting the nails after a rape makes no sense at all. I also failed to mention in my earlier post about the Abrams report that CF's parents revealed that RS, CF, and DE all passed polygraph tests. Finally, I think Duke's administration is "making a statement" in the case by re-admitting McFadyen. By taking this action the administration is telling the public that the email was a bad joke about a movie which is included in the university curriculum. Further, they are saying that if this it brought up during the trial, the defense will be able to use the university's action as a rebuttal of the notion that the player on the team had some sort of criminal intent (no mens rea).

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#162)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:55:47 PM EST
    january - Thanks. Glad you liked it (and that someone knew who he was). Anyway, here is how his dramatic reenactment of the crime might look during the closing arguments scene. Chilling.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#163)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:57:49 PM EST
    Newport said:
    Nifong said on national TV that if he believed the accuser that he was duty bound to pursue the case and that was what he was going to do.
    Newport's said (and acted out) many things in many places. Fortunately we can just read the rules, in particular Rule 3.8
    The prosecutor in a criminal case shall: (a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;
    Neither the Nifong belief in the complainant doctrine nor the Nifong time of identification of the accused doctrine appear in 3.8.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#164)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 05:31:46 PM EST
    Nifong said on national TV that if he believed the accuser that he was duty bound to pursue the case and that was what he was going to do.
    Did Nifong say this after the DNA came back proving that the AV gave a false statement to the police in a felony investigation regarding her sexual abstinance over the prior week?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#165)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 05:43:15 PM EST
    Don't know. But I know who would.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#166)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 05:45:16 PM EST
    Alan wrote,
    Newport's said (and acted out) many things in many places.
    Huh? I am I Nifong now just because I said I didn't think he would knowingly suborn perjury?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#167)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 05:54:01 PM EST
    Pat wrote,
    A couple of things. The players asserted that the AV was painting her nails while she locked herself in the bathroom. The defense has pictures of the AV during the dance (with some missing fake nails) and unpainted real nails
    Ah, I didn't know this. Interesting.
    After the dance, on the way out of the house, I believe the defense has pictures that suggests that her nails have now been painted. This would support the players assertion and cast doubt on a rape charge - if the nails were painted early on - then Seligmann is definitely out - and painting the nails after a rape makes no sense at all.
    Didn't know this either. Thanks. I wonder what the hell the fake nails were doing laying around in the bathroom. Did she take off the other fakies and throw them on the ground and then paint the real nails when she saw she was missing two fake nails? So under this scenario the recovered fake nails would have been painted. The FA must have been a sight to behold when she came walking around that corner.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#168)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:07:35 PM EST
    Newport: As I understand it, the fake nails are "press-ons." I guess that means they have adhesive at the base and are used to extend the length of the "real" nails. Per the defense (I'll try to find the citations, but it's Tour de France time), the AV lost some nails during the dance and then sought to remove the remaining ones while she was in the bathroom. Once these were removed, she then painted the real nails. According to the DA, the press-on nails came off during a struggle and no nail polish was applied afterward. Thus, the nail extenders (fake nails) were, one way or the other, left in the bathroom and eventually ended up in the trash can. That's my understanding of the issue.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#169)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:08:28 PM EST
    imho argued,
    Finnerty's witnesses may be in a position where they have to take the fifth to avoid incriminating themselves.
    why would that be true? Didn't they already plead? How can you take the fifth if you face no consequences for any self incrimination you may provide. Answer: You can't. That's why you can't plead the 5th if you have transactional immunity.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#170)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:17:33 PM EST
    Pat, well then it should just be a matter of enhancing photographs to show that the FA had painted nails when she was on the stoop. Unless, of course, someone wants to argue that the boys painted her nails for her during the 3-way evidence free rape. I think they were in the bathroom for a long time based on Robert's statement. They were in there long enough for the boys to start beating on the door to get them out.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#171)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:20:15 PM EST
    IMHO Asked:
    Were you implying anything with your "Though he may have been a fair guy in the past, this case is a long way from traffic court" comment?
    Yes. I was implying that he is in over his head - this case, and the national media scrutiny it brings, is far too much for him. It might be affecting his behavior - being a "deer in the headlights" might cause him to act in ways he might not otherwise. I thought that seemed pretty clear in the context of the related posts in the thread at that time. If not, now you know. I did imply I would questions his ethics and integrity in how he might approach a trial, but I did not discuss his ability as a trial lawyer. We just don't know! Maybe you could dig up some of those "failing to come to a complete stop" and "failing to signal a left turn" cases he may have prosecuted over the last few years and we can discuss that?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#172)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:20:20 PM EST
    Newport: Here are some citations. Link1 link2 Link3

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#173)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:27:50 PM EST
    Whether someone is a good trial lawyer or not is all a matter of perspective. I wouldn't take at face value anything said by those defense attorney sycophants they have put up on TV. The last thing one of those lawyers wants to do is give Mr. Nifong a case of the red ass toward them because then they could kiss them pleas goodbye. We'll see how good a trial lawyer Mr. Nifong is and we'll see if Mr. Titus is anything more than Judge Ito II.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#174)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:35:25 PM EST
    Yikes, I have to weigh in here. Judge Titus is not a Judge Ito, but you're right about the rest of it. One of the lawyers who is a laughing stock in town, truly, has a gig with a cable network and a national news magazine. Could not have happened to a more undeserving guy, who knows less about the law. Why didn't they call me?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#175)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:38:51 PM EST
    Thanks Pat, good links. A couple things jumped out at me in addition to the stuff about the missing fingernail. * There was apparently only one photographer and one camera. * The pictures were taken with a real camera, not a camera phone, hence a flash and better resolution to blow up. Finally, this unbelievable statement:
    Defense attorneys said they had offered to show the pictures to District Attorney Mike Nifong, but he declined to see them.


    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#176)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:45:21 PM EST
    Yeah, let's get localone on Greta for some real commentary on the case, just please leave out the Duke hating part. Although I do agree that the Cameron Crazies act the fool. By the way, I don't hate UNC, have never said "go to hell Carolina" in my life, and actually root for Carolina when they play in the NCAA tourney. And I even played against Carolina at Duke. So, localone please don't hate all Dukies.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#177)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:47:28 PM EST
    One of the lawyers who is a laughing stock in town, truly, has a gig with a cable network and a national news magazine. Could not have happened to a more undeserving guy, who knows less about the law.
    Could that be Woody?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#178)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:56:23 PM EST
    Newport, it's just in my blood, but maybe I never met a Dukie who actually pulled for the Heels in the NCAA. I know a shameful number of Coach K jokes. I actually felt a pang of empathy for Reddick in the end of the season, and so maybe I'm evolving. But why would such a smart boy do a U turn in a police check stop? Until recently, I would have thought you had to know something about criminal law (or any law) to get paid to talk on one of those shows, but silly me, now I know better. I can't watch most of them because they make me start talking to the television, loudly, and then my children start to think I'm crazy.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#179)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:57:22 PM EST
    Well I wasn't talking about Woody.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#180)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:05:07 PM EST
    N & O April 27, 2005 Mike Nifong is to be sworn in today as Durham's district attorney
    "I've tried every kind of case against him, from murder to speeding," Durham defense lawyer Bill Thomas said after the governor announced Nifong's appointment. "He is just an outstanding courtroom lawyer."


    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#181)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:09:05 PM EST
    I will bet Nifong is not so smug anymore. He went on a month long high where the riskiest place in America was between him and a TV camera. "Look at me and all the fawning attention! I am a media darling." This past month he has been vilified, and many of the knee jerk journalists from the left are even abandoning this ship in rodent-like fashion. He must be drinking super-sized Prozac smoothies to get through the highs and lows. Now we will likely have only Cheek to get on the ballot, so the anybody-but-Nifong vote will not be split. With his 2 to 1 support from the AA community, he still only won by 800+ votes, or 2%, and it was a three way race. In a community with 140,000 registered voters, Nifong got 11,200 votes, and Black and Bishop shared 15,600. I believe that Nifong's negatives will be a powerful motivator to get out the vote, and attract a large portion of Republican voters, who were not even counted in the Democratic primary. Link to Durham vote count. I predict Nifong loses in November, and forging ahead with this turkey of a case or dropping it will not help him. Mikey, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. (In between trips...missed you guys)

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#182)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:10:19 PM EST
    david_in_ct posted:
    Did Nifong say this after the DNA came back proving that the AV gave a false statement to the police in a felony investigation regarding her sexual abstinance over the prior week?
    ABC News May 13, 2006
    DNA experts tell ABC News that genetic traces of semen can remain in the body up to six days after intercouse.


    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#183)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:18:56 PM EST
    BIP and Sharon, are you guys out buying illegal fireworks? Miss your perspective, although Sharon, I am shocked that you even knew the "If Statement" about aunts and uncles. Now if you answer a rhetorical question with a reference to the Pope in the woods, I will have lost all hope. :)

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#184)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:27:25 PM EST
    This is a stretch, but certainly an avenue for inquiry. If you look at the 12:30:47 photo here of AV exiting (most likely exiting) the back door, you see an open make-up bag, unzipped along the full length of the top. Visible, on top of the pile of stuff in there, there appears a little container. Might it be fingernail polish? If the photo quality was better, the answer might be clearer.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#185)
    by Alan on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:29:37 PM EST
    Newport said:
    Huh? I am I Nifong now just because I said I didn't think he would knowingly suborn perjury?
    My deepest apologies. There is no truth to the rumour that I typed this in an effort to get the bungle of the week prize.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#186)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:40:18 PM EST
    IMHO posted:
    I don't want her story to be true. I don't want her to have been attacked. I don't want these young men to have done that to anyone. Why would I?
    To vindicate your position?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#187)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 07:50:20 PM EST
    banco55: My position has always been that I do not know who is lying here. I'd like to hear the accuser tell her story herself and I'd like to see the rest of prosecution's case before deciding who I think is lying. My position requires no vindication, yours may.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#188)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:18:48 PM EST
    fillintheblanks, When the photos were first mentioned, before Dan Abrams showed them on his program, I recall Ekstrand describing one of the photos and saying you could clearly see a cell phone in her purse.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#189)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:20:39 PM EST
    IMHO wrote: They should have stuck to what they said on the interview I saw. Gee, sounded the same. But maybe the same suggestion could have been extended to the AV and her family.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#190)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:28:42 PM EST
    lightenup, I admit that I spent a large part of the day hiking over the hills along the Pacific, listening to hours of Richard Thompson. I haven't seen all that much to sink my teeth into regarding the case. No fireworks here. Our poor old Akita gets very nervous about firecrackers, so it'll be touch and go all weekend.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#191)
    by Lora on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:36:31 PM EST
    The third link Pat posted at 7:20 PM had a very complete summary of the proposed timeline and the witnesses' narratives so far (although I couldn't help noticing they also wrongly had "bedroom" instead of "bathroom" from Shelton's report). And I don't think Bissey knew what time it was (except for "midnight" - from his affidavit). wumhenry, you posted:
    You mean, we have not been told how much force was used? Not so. According to the police affidavit, she was hit in the face, kicked, and strangled, and her arms and legs were restrained.
    My point was, being "hit in the face, kicked and strangled" could have left minor injuries, or serious injuries, depending on how much force was used (if it happened). We Just Don't Know. BTW, on the apparent lack of corroborating medical evidence: Do people here think Nifong actually lied about the evidence and just made it up to fit the AV's description of the rape? What about Detective Hinan and the injuries mentioned in the search warrant? (I know, I know, "consistent with," but you can't get injuries "consistent with" out of no injuries at all - the exception being the va*inal swelling/redness.) And the behavior? Did Hinan just make the stuff up? What about the ESPN witness? Was he/she made up? A plant? I mean, if the injuries were just made up, that would be criminal. Seems unlikely to me. imho posted,
    I don't want her story to be true. I don't want her to have been attacked. I don't want these young men to have done that to anyone. Why would I?
    Exactly.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#192)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:40:55 PM EST
    Nifong said on national TV that if he believed the accuser that he was duty bound to pursue the case and that was what he was going to do.
    That's a big IF, Mikey. Aside from the fact that the statement is inconsistent with the relevant NC ethical rule. (Good one, Alan.) IMHO:
    My position has always been that I do not know who is lying here. I'd like to hear the accuser tell her story herself and I'd like to see the rest of prosecution's case before deciding who I think is lying. My position requires no vindication
    Your position has also been that the very fact that Mike Nifong continues to prosecute is reason enough to assume there's probable cause because Nifong was a Phi Beta Kappa and has a sterling reputation. I don't think that non sequitur is going to be vindicated.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#193)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:59:43 PM EST
    Imho:
    DNA experts tell ABC News that genetic traces of semen can remain in the body up to six days after intercouse.
    'Can remain' seems to imply that normally they are long since gone by then. A little googling shows that at least North Dakota and New York both do not recommend trying to collect trace evidence if the rape has occured more than 96 hours ago. One would assume that is because the chance of finding evidence beyond that time frame to be vanishingly small. Best I can tell, a week has been 7 days for a good bit more than 2000 years. Another interesting sideline to possibility of miraculously long-lived sperm and their remains (a strange modern paralell to the Chanukah story) is that Johnson claimed originally that he and the AV had a romp on I believe March 12. Oddly enough after checking his cellphone calendar he added an addendum to his statement claiming that the tryst actually took place the Sunday prior. This always struck me as a bit out of the ordinary since I could never fathom keeping a log of ones encounters but perhaps thats just me and maybe Johnson and the AV were trying to have a child and they were tracking her monthly ovulation cycle for maximum effect. Then again an alternate hypothesis is that he did indeed have sex with the AV on the 12th as first advertised and the DNA found on or in the AV is his. Perhaps someone from DPD (who at the time would not have known what the DNA might turn up) thought it best that the AV have had no sexual encounters immediately prior to the event so that there would be no convenient way to explain vaginal swelling...

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#194)
    by wumhenry on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:12:49 PM EST
    And I'm not sure that the assertion that "genetic traces of semen can remain in the body up to six days after intercouse" tells us how long semen can be there and still produce a complete DNA match, like they got to Johnson.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#195)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:20:43 PM EST
    david_in_ct posted:
    Best I can tell, a week has been 7 days for a good bit more than 2000 years
    Do you think if she had been off by one day in recalling/relating when she last had consensual intercourse Nifong should determine she is a liar and should doubt her claims on that false statement? She did say it was with her boyfriend and it was her boyfriend's semen. david_in_ct posted:
    This always struck me as a bit out of the ordinary since I could never fathom keeping a log of ones encounters but perhaps thats just me and maybe Johnson and the AV were trying to have a child and they were tracking her monthly ovulation cycle for maximum effect.
    Could he be keeping track of the rides he gave her and the hours spent waiting in the car for purposes of reimbursement from the escort agency? He may have remembered the "encounter" by looking up what day he brought her to which hotel. The "encounter" took place in a hotel.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#196)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:27:19 PM EST
    wumhenry posted:
    And I'm not sure that the assertion that "genetic traces of semen can remain in the body up to six days after intercouse" tells us how long semen can be there and still produce a complete DNA match, like they got to Johnson.
    That's a good point. There is greater chance of degradation as time goes on. DNA profiles have been obtained from 16 day old semen found in dead bodies - less enzyme action and usually less body heat.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#197)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:28:36 PM EST
    IMHO posted:
    My position has always been that I do not know who is lying here. I'd like to hear the accuser tell her story herself and I'd like to see the rest of prosecution's case before deciding who I think is lying. My position requires no vindication, yours may
    I don't think even you really believe that Nifong is holding back anything that could turn this case around for him. He'd have to be a magician.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#198)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:31:56 PM EST
    IMHO posted:
    She did say it was with her boyfriend and it was her boyfriend's semen.
    When did she say that? When did Nifong know that?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#199)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:36:52 PM EST
    IMHO,
    Do you think if she had been off by one day in recalling/relating when she last had consensual intercourse Nifong should determine she is a liar and should doubt her claims on that false statement?
    There are many reasons Nifong should determine she is a liar. Not sure this makes the top 20....

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#200)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 10:51:58 PM EST
    imho
    Do you think if she had been off by one day in recalling/relating when she last had consensual intercourse Nifong should determine she is a liar and should doubt her claims on that false statement? She did say it was with her boyfriend and it was her boyfriend's semen.
    The only study I could find that gave stats on the probability of semen recovery after rape put it at around 37%. Of this 37% the highest proportion, something like 60%, came from exams done with 24 hours. The dropoff was considerable after then. This study was done in 1992 so the technology was likely quite poor in relation to what it is today. Given that NY and ND both have current guidelines stating that physicians should not bother to do a rape kit collection of trace evidence after 4 days, one can assume that the possibility of the AV actually only having had sex 6 or 7 days prior is remote (As in approaching zero). Knowing nothing other than that DNA was identified from semen one would conclude that the highest probability was that it was deposited most recently and that the probability function would fall to near 0 at t - 96 hours. So if someone told me they hadn't had sex the prior week and I was presented with the same results the DA was, my first thought would be that the person had lied, the second thought would be that perhaps her recollected was wrong, the third, and in the extreme remote bin, would be that she had sex precisely a week ago and that this was the 1 in 1000+? shot that the DNA survived and was collected Do you know if the DNA match was confirmed to be Johnson, or is that just rumor? Also, when she finally recollected that she had slept with her boyfriend did she give a date and time?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#201)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:00:01 PM EST
    The DNA is supposed to be her "boyfriend" Matthew Murchison or something like that. He had sex with her on like Sat or Sun before the Monday party. It's in the Johnson statement. Murchison is 38 years old and can't drive because he has DUI's going back years. I think he's up on some charges right now. From the Johnson statement, Murchison also apparently didn't know Precious was a hooker and he may have beat the sh*t out of her when he picked her up from the hospital. This is if Aunt Shirley and cousin Jack/Jakki are to be believed that Precious was all beat up and had her eyes swelled shut when she came back from the hospital. Don't understand how foreign semen could survive with a three man gang rape. Wouldn't it be "driven" out so to speak? Maybe someone can explain that one to me.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#202)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:05:14 PM EST
    SomewhatChunky Th
    ere are many reasons Nifong should determine she is a liar. Not sure this makes the top 20...
    I agree. Why "pile on" when we don't know if this is a lie?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#203)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:08:30 PM EST
    TH's on TV all say after 72 hours to forget collecting semen. It won't be there. Imho is all wet on this one. Murchison deposited the semen on Sat, Sun or maybe even Monday. The FA lied, and Johnson lied when he moved his date with the FA and Chinese food back a week. As SomeWhatChunky said, this does not make the top 20 lies.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#204)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:08:42 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    Don't understand how foreign semen could survive with a three man gang rape. Wouldn't it be "driven" out so to speak? Maybe someone can explain that one to me.
    If this were true how do results from rape kits come up with mixed semen samples?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#205)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:11:50 PM EST
    Then why no mixed sample in this case? Oh, condoms were used. Then why no sample mixed with latex etc.?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#206)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:12:54 PM EST
    Oh, that wouldn't prove anything anyway given the FA's profession and activity level.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#207)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:14:32 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    TH's on TV all say after 72 hours to forget collecting semen.
    You've seen every TH on TV that gave an opinion on that? I don't think so.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#208)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:16:45 PM EST
    I think so. The one's I have seen anyway.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#209)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:24:47 PM EST
    Imho:
    Could he be keeping track of the rides he gave her and the hours spent waiting in the car for purposes of reimbursement from the escort agency? He may have remembered the "encounter" by looking up what day he brought her to which hotel. The "encounter" took place in a hotel.
    Having just reread the Johnson statement this seems quite unlikely. His statement is filled with much detail of dates and times. He recalls going to the hotel, then going out to get chinese food (and remembering which chinese restaurant they went to) then coming back, having dinner, watching tv and having sex. Then he also relates that he left at 12:00 am and that the AV was to call him the next morning. The whole narrative reads fluidly, and has a strong ring of good recollection. The addendum is ad hock with the 'I looked it up on my cell phone calendar'. To have faith in the addendum one must believe he could remember eating chinese food for dinner, knowing what restaurant they went to get it, leaving at 12:00 with an agreement that she would call in the morning, but forgot that they did not have sex but now clearly remember it as having occured a week earlier by looking at his cell phone calendar. No dice.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#210)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:25:31 PM EST
    Imho, as I have said many times before there should be no dispute that the FA had sex with at least 5 different men in the 3 days prior to the party. It's really a minor miracle that more semen (a mixed sample if you will) wasn't found in her. Although most of Precious clients probably did use condoms as Nifong said, sex with the FA without a condom would not be a wise choice. This info is much more pertinent to explain the diffuse edema than to whether Precious lied about her chastity.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#211)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:27:49 PM EST
    IMHO, If you know, could you answer my question about when the AV told Nifong about the boyfriend and the semen? I don't have a link and would like to know when Nifong knew that. Thanks.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#212)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:29:05 PM EST
    Newport:
    Don't understand how foreign semen could survive with a three man gang rape. Wouldn't it be "driven" out so to speak? Maybe someone can explain that one to me.
    I can't think of any reason why you couldn't have lots and lots of dna in there. its not like the new sperm bring along sperm hunter cells which destroy all other sperm in the neighborhood.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#213)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:32:10 PM EST
    Yeah, sperm hunters. LOL. I would think it would drip out though. Just a guess.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#214)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:33:53 PM EST
    Don't understand how foreign semen could survive with a three man gang rape. Wouldn't it be "driven" out so to speak? Maybe someone can explain that one to me.
    Sucked out, actually. I saw a show on reproduction on TLC or some other similar channel recently that showed how during sex a johnson is like a piston, and when it's "in action" it sucks/pulls out previously deposited semen. Obviously not 100% effective, but something about survival of the fittest I think. The show also showed video of how, in missionary position, during (her) orgasm the cervix dips down into the pool of deposited semen like a bird drinking at a fountain. Truly amazing. But I digress... I know, I know, no links, no source and I can't invite you to call me and listen to me play it on a DVD I burned. It is all true, however. Good night and I'll catch up on Wednesday. Hopefully we won't still be debating the fingernail...

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#215)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:40:28 PM EST
    See, everyone made fun of me and I was right. The foreign DNA should not be there if she was gang raped. That is what I originally thought. Murchison must have made the deposit right before the party for it to be so fresh.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#216)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:41:04 PM EST
    Nite all...

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#217)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:46:13 PM EST
    Since mom and dad were on TV today, I've been thinking about Colin. Once she cut her deal with Nifong, Kim
    said she recalls seeing Finnerty -- whom she described as the "little skinny one." "I was looking him right in the eyes," she said.
    How big (I'm talking height here) is ole Kim anyway? I don't think she was looking him in the eyes. Colin's 6'3" and is one of the biggest guys on the team. They have one guy at 6'6", a few a 6'4" and then there is Colin at 6'3". Seems that in a room full of Duke Lax Players, he'd be the tall one. I've also read differing accounts of his weight - some say he's around 210, though the roster says he's 175. Anyone, in all of the photos I've seen of him - he looks really big. See these photos: Link1 Link2 Link3 Link4 Of course, he does have that baby face. And if I was making up a story based upon head shots, I might erroneously extrapolate that "baby face" look to to "little". Would Kim do that? Old honest Kim?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#218)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:53:55 PM EST
    Yeah, he could pass for a guard on the basketball team. He's about Reddick's size. Kim never saw him.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#219)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 12:12:21 AM EST
    The story that came out today from CF's parents that their lawyers found out CF was on the "short list" is bizarre. How could CF make a "short list" when there is no physical evidence against him and the FA said she was raped by Bret, Matt and Dave/Adam. This "short list" obviously came from the police so why were they "zeroing" in on Finnerty. Did they get some hints from the early lineups the FA was shown. Did the FA pause in the early lineups on Finnerty and say something without actually ID'ing him. This makes no sense to me.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#220)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 12:15:07 AM EST
    What I am saying is that if anyone was on the short list it should have been Bret, Matt and Dan/Adam, not Colin Finnerty. Perhaps they were zeroing in on him because of the DC charge that was widely publicized. My intuition tells me that this is correct.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#221)
    by Alan on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 12:21:38 AM EST
    Pittman could have had a telescope with her as one of the toys for her performance. If she looked at Finnerty through the wrong end of the telescope (being confused and angry because of the argument) then he would appear much smaller than he actually is. Until the prosecution produces the telescope, we just don't know.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#222)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 01:53:22 AM EST
    Newport said:
    What in the world would counter charges have to do with anything? You don't know one bit of the evidence about what happened on the street. It was a fight like the fights that happen every single night on the streets around Georgetown when the bars empty out at 2 am. Maybe the other guy did something verbally or otherwise to cause CF to strike. That is self-defense and the fact that the other two or three may have taken pleas is absolutely meaningless.
    I think you don't know what you are talking about. If you punch somebody in a fist fight it is no more self defense than if you shoot somebody in a duel. And the other two taking pleas implies it was three on one not exactly a fair fight. It is natural to feel sympathy for someone wrongly accused like CF appears to be in this case but being wrongly accused doesn't make you a good guy or innocent in an earlier unrelated case

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#223)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:08:40 AM EST
    inmyhumbleopinion posted:
    I don't want her story to be true. I don't want her to have been attacked. I don't want these young men to have done that to anyone. Why would I?
    So you would like to see the AV give a press conference and admit she made the whole story up? I am not entirely convinced.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#224)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:12:20 AM EST
    Finnerty's DC case....
    D.C. prosecutors did not treat the attack as a hate crime, said U.S. Attorney spokesperson Stephanie Bragg Lee, because the circumstances didn't warrant hate crime status. "It was an argument between two young guys who were sizing each other up," she said. "Both sides had an equal portion of discussion, so we felt it wasn't specifically a hate crime. So we waived the option there."
    No agenda here and no desire to get into a back and forth on this case. The above quote is from this.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#225)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:18:02 AM EST
    lora posted:
    Do people here think Nifong actually lied about the evidence and just made it up to fit the AV's description of the rape? What about Detective Hinan and the injuries mentioned in the search warrant? (I know, I know, "consistent with," but you can't get injuries "consistent with" out of no injuries at all - the exception being the va*inal swelling/redness.) And the behavior? Did Hinan just make the stuff up? What about the ESPN witness? Was he/she made up? A plant?
    I mean, if the injuries were just made up, that would be criminal. Seems unlikely to me.
    Remember the coal mine accident not too long ago when they announced all the missing miners were safe and then it turned out most of them were dead. People make mistakes especially when they want to believe something. And then they can be reluctant to admit they fouled up.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#226)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:47:17 AM EST
    lora posted:
    My understanding in PA is that "no means no" for 2nd degree rape. Proving that, however, would be very difficult. It would be "he said/she said," and how do you get past reasonable doubt? That's probably one reason why you don't get as many charges as you might think. Another reason is that if the perp denies the charge, the victim generally goes through hell (in terms of being called a liar, held in contempt, ostracized, denied support), and generally more hell than the perp, from the stories I've heard in class. Add that to the emotional struggle with dealing with the rape itself, and you have less charges filed.
    It may be hard to prove in some cases but not in all cases. First it is not he said/she said unless he takes the stand. If he takes the stand all sorts of past bad behavior which would not otherwise be admissable can be brought up. So if he for example has prior convictions for sex crimes taking the stand may not be a real viable option. Second he said/she said is mainly a problem in a date situation since it is generally assumed that a woman who goes on a date with a man has some sexual interest in him and hence might plausibly consent to sex. In other situations like homeless guy in a woman's restroom consent is not too plausible regardless of what the homeless guy claims on the stand. Third as in the Mike Tyson case the jury may decide it believes her and doesn't believe him.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#227)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:30:20 AM EST
    Mike Tyson might have beat the rap if his lawyer wasn't so incompetent. Don King insisted that his lawyer represent Tyson. His lawyer dealt with civil stuff for king but had little to no criminal experience.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#228)
    by ding7777 on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:13:07 AM EST
    to sarcastic unnamed one, Newport, david_in_ct re the sp*rm hunter theory - this article describes the process as a human competition strategy Evolutionary Psychology

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#229)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:16:48 AM EST
    Boys just wanna have fun...
    Tyson says he wants to rape victim and her mother By CORKY SIEMASZKO New York Daily News
    NEW YORK - Former heavyweight champion Mike Tyson said talking about the beauty queen he was jailed for raping in 1991 makes him so mad he would rape her - and her mother.
    "She's a lying, monstrous young lady - I just hate her guts," Tyson said. "She puts me in that state where I don't know . . . but now I really do want to rape her and her (expletive) mama."
    In an explosive interview with Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren, Tyson claimed "slimy" Desiree Washington accused him of assaulting her in an Indiana hotel room because she was "money hungry."
    "Anybody else having fun like that, it's young boys having fun," Tyson said. "But it's me, I'm a big black rapist. . . . That's the stigma I'm left with."


    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#230)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:19:31 AM EST
    James B. Shearer
    So you would like to see the AV give a press conference and admit she made the whole story up? I am not entirely convinced.
    Yes, I would. Why would I lie about that?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#231)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:22:56 AM EST
    James B. Shearer wrote,
    I think you don't know what you are talking about. If you punch somebody in a fist fight it is no more self defense than if you shoot somebody in a duel. And the other two taking pleas implies it was three on one not exactly a fair fight.
    Before you accuse someone of not knowing what they are talking about, you really ought to be sure you know what you are talking about and not talking out your ass. I don't know if you are from Australia and have some special insight into American law or not but let me assure you that one can have a self-defense defense to charges stemming from a fist fight. If you do not think so then I suggest you stay tuned for the CF trial or perhaps you can satisfy yourself by resort to some text of American law. Furthermore, your last statement re the number of parties involved is not correct either. Stick to assinine comments re statistics, it is more appropriate.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#232)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:30:23 AM EST
    Newport posted:
    Imho, as I have said many times before there should be no dispute that the FA had sex with at least 5 different men in the 3 days prior to the party. It's really a minor miracle that more semen (a mixed sample if you will) wasn't found in her. Although most of Precious clients probably did use condoms as Nifong said, sex with the FA without a condom would not be a wise choice.
    This info is much more pertinent to explain the diffuse edema than to whether Precious lied about her chastity.
    The problem with this info is that you made it up.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#233)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:31:51 AM EST
    I know, I made it up from whole cloth didn't I.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#234)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:51:48 AM EST
    SomewhatChunky quoted:
    "It was an argument between two young guys who were sizing each other up," she said. "Both sides had an equal portion of discussion, so we felt it wasn't specifically a hate crime. So we waived the option there."
    She is discussing the "gay bashing" hate crime aspect of the crime. From the same article:
    "I think it's pretty clear that while he was not the victim of a gay bashing, the intent of those words was clearly along those lines," Royer said
    "This has been picked up [in the media] as an issue of gay bashing," Royer said. "Frankly, to us, it's relevant, but the real crux of our situation is a violent act was committed and now we're left to deal with it."
    Duke athlete faces April hearing here
    According to court records for the Georgetown assault, Bloxsom told police "he was minding his business" when Finnerty and two other men "began picking on him for no apparent reason."
    Records say Bloxsom "told them to stop calling him gay and other derogatory names." When Bloxsom tried to walk away, the three men "attacked him, busting his lip and bruising his chin." Bloxsom was treated for his injuries.
    Duke player has D.C. strife April 26, 2006
    Assistant U.S. Attorney Ben Curtis said his office had discussed Finnerty's Durham case "at length" and had concerns about similarities between charges in Durham and in Washington. In both cases, Curtis said, Finnerty "was out late at night, drinking alcohol, and with lacrosse teammates."
    Unless his attorney can get some kind of plea together, Collin is going down.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#235)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:55:46 AM EST
    Newport posted:
    I know, I made it up from whole cloth didn't I.
    No, not from whole cloth, from assumptions that her "dates" always include v@ginal sex with a man. According to her they do not. The one date about which we heard the particulars did not include it.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#236)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 05:00:58 AM EST
    How does this "the sp*rm hunter" theory fit into the fact that rape kit results can show semen samples from multiple offenders and/or and a rapist's semen mixed with semen from previous consensual intercourse?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#237)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 05:25:51 AM EST
    Newport wrote: But, all that being said, I do think he "believes" the FA despite all the reasons for not doing so. Maybe the FA in person comes off as incredibly sincere. I don't know because I haven't seen her. Some patheological liars come off as sincere. They are good at lying. Thus, I do not believe that he would be suborning perjury by the mere act of putting the FA on the stand. But: What about Kim? He's clearly leaned on her to change her story from more-or-less true (minus anything that might look incriminating to herself in the matter of theft) to half-true with several key falsehoods (to support the date-rape drug story and open a wider window of opportunity). In any case, if Nifong doesn' "know" he is persecuting the innocent only because he has refused to look at evidence he must expect would be exculpatory, he may not be acting from actual malice, but is certainly acting from depraved indifference, which is morally every bit as bad, though in the zany NC legal system it may somehow be less criminal. To my mind, the way he conducted the line-up, carefully avoiding any real test of the accuser's reliability, amounts to a virtual confession that he knew her accusation to be a "crock".

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#238)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 07:41:04 AM EST
    How big (I'm talking height here) is ole Kim anyway? I don't think she was looking him in the eyes. Colin's 6'3" and is one of the biggest guys on the team. They have one guy at 6'6", a few a 6'4" and then there is Colin at 6'3". Seems that in a room full of Duke Lax Players, he'd be the tall one. I've also read differing accounts of his weight - some say he's around 210, though the roster says he's 175.
    Anyone, in all of the photos I've seen of him - he looks really big. See these photos: Link1 Link2 Link3 Link4
    Somewhat Chunky: One of the best most astute posts I've seen on these threads. I'm surprised IMHO didn't pick up on it, since she is pretty obsessive about this case. Busy chasing the little IMHOrugrats around the couch, I suppose. Anyway, thank you. Just another nail in the coffin of this "case".

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#239)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 08:01:42 AM EST
    Re: "targeting" CF So how easity could an interested party learn the names of the lacrosse players and the high schools they attended? Duke lacrosse web page? How difficult to discover which of them had prior interaction with the authorities? Perhaps that depends on access, but maybe not. There is a large number of people and interest groups who have a stake in this mess. I find it unimaginable that the police and DA would not have had access to all such information. I think it is likely that the Black Panthers had access, whoever made the "wanted" poster obviously did, and I wonder if the accuser also could have had "known" who these guys were before the lineup sessions. Did she get even more help than we suspect? Maybe CF was too great a temptation despite his absence. Yep, I admit I have lost faith in the process.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#240)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 08:18:39 AM EST
    Why did Nifong take up Precious' cause personally? Why didn't he let another prosecutor carry the standard since his job at that point was largely administrative? Why did he interject himself into the investigative process? Why did he resort to breaches of procedure that could get the identifications tossed? Why did he seek indictments so quickly and just in advance of his election? Why did he shoot off his mouth like he did? Why did he "help" Kim with her bail problem? Why has he tried to "get" every member of that team? Why did he "harass" the cab driver? Why does he behave with such indignity in the courtroom? I submit: MALICE

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#241)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 08:26:27 AM EST
    Don't understand how foreign semen could survive with a three man gang rape. Wouldn't it be "driven" out so to speak?
    Yes, Newport, and there would be a consequence of this. "Something" we would see; and yet, there would be another obvious explanation for its presence which doesn't involve a three man gang rape. Don't expect to see anything at all about this from discovery (if it's there or not) until there is (sigh) a trial.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#242)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 08:38:46 AM EST
    Photios wrote:
    In any case, if Nifong doesn' "know" he is persecuting the innocent only because he has refused to look at evidence he must expect would be exculpatory, he may not be acting from actual malice, but is certainly acting from depraved indifference, which is morally every bit as bad, though in the zany NC legal system it may somehow be less criminal.
    I like the quotes on "know." I suggest that not "knowing" is a convenient way to avoid an actual charge of malice, but he may well be doing just that. I keep trying to see him as just a guy who wants to do right but is ill-equipped to do so, I really do. Yet something about all his actions strikes me as vindictive and spiteful (even toward the accuser), and he really seems to be enjoying himself. Like it's a lark! Fifteen minutes of infamy? Like some kind of justice, neither mundane nor cosmic, but intensely personal.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#243)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 08:43:17 AM EST
    imho wrote,
    No, not from whole cloth, from assumptions that her "dates" always include v@ginal sex with a man. According to her they do not. The one date about which we heard the particulars did not include it.
    What a truly ridiculous comment. What do you think hookers do in hour long private one on one showings. Who do you think wants to see Precious "put on a show" for an hour in a one on one? What about the guy she fished out of the strip club at 4:30 am then met up with at 5:30 in some hotel. You think he just hadn't seen enough strippin at that point and needed an hour more of a private showing. You show what a fool you are with comments such as this. And this is even more true when you couple it with comments the CF is "going down" and all that ohter crap you regurgitate. You make all manner of assumptions when it comes to CF re "how he is going down" etc., but you try to make this nasty stripper/hooker into something wholesome. What a joke.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#244)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 08:51:41 AM EST
    Concerning this:
    You make all manner of assumptions when it comes to CF re "how he is going down" etc., but you try to make this nasty stripper/hooker into something wholesome.
    It's an interesting mindset, Newport. Alien to me. Perhaps that is why I'm unable to grasp the inimitable Nifong. Okay, so maybe not inimitable. Heh.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#245)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:00:21 AM EST
    Hope everyone's having a nice holiday weekend. It is absurd to think that DNA would remain identifiable in a woman's vagina after a week of sex work and a gang rape. Now I'm going to take a shower and go shopping.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#246)
    by Lora on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:00:38 AM EST
    From Somewhat Chunky's Link 4:
    Cheshire said the testing did find some genetic material from several people on a plastic fingernail found in a bathroom trash can of the house where the team held the March 13 party. He said some of that material had the "same characteristics" - a link short of a conclusive match - to some of the players, but not the two who have been charged with rape, kidnapping and sexual assault.
    All but one player were eliminated. More Cheshire "spin." (Sorry, suo, I couldn't resist. BTW, I must tell ya, that part about making the DVD was just...an overshare -.-) James B, you posted,
    People make mistakes especially when they want to believe something.
    Making mistakes is one thing...inventing injuries is at a whole different level. Either the medical reports that we have heard about are wrong, or the bruises on the AV on the defense photos were faked. Even I don't think they faked the bruises. They at least should have been documented. That tells me that there is something wrong with what we've heard about the medical reports. Alternatively, the AV could have been examined by incompetent medical personnel. James B, you made good points about cases involving non-consensual sex. I will just add that in the majority of sexual assault cases (about 60% I believe) the perp is known to the victim. Also, from my class I learned that the perp may have all the character witnesses he can find, not so the victim.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#247)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:03:37 AM EST
    Madison and Photios, Interesting question if the Ostrich maneuver can make one legally chargeable with knowledge that the FA is lying. I don't know. There are civil cases where an intentional avoidance of the truth amounts to misconduct. The CF targeting and the lineup procedures along with a lot of other things the DA has done do point to actual malice unless he can offer a convincing explanation for his actions. Thus far, he has not and he has not done the accuser any favors either by pushing something that she almost certainly wanted to go away.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#248)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:04:25 AM EST
    I mean, where was the elderly sperm hiding?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#249)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:08:26 AM EST
    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#250)
    by Lora on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:13:47 AM EST
    Newport, you posted,
    What do you think hookers do in hour long private one on one showings.
    And you assume it would have to be va*inal sex? Surely you are more creative than that!

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#251)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:15:14 AM EST
    Newport, you seem to be getting frustrated lately. IMHO's contributions to the discussions have been very valuable, I think, although insanely frustrating me at times. Having gone through all that is known and supposed, having reviewed from any and all possible angles, having required proof and sources for verification, I reach a conclusion at the end of the path knowing that any and all rocks have been turned over, examined, and considered. Thus, I have a high degree of confidence, as well as knowing where the gaps in the critical analysis are.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#252)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:15:47 AM EST
    You crack me up, Bob. You know the reason for not relying on DNA results from sperm after a few days is because the little fellows die. So the DNA degrades, and while one can still get some genetic information from it, one will not recover a full profile. In addition and most interestingly, if the sperm were a mixture from more than one source, one would not be able to reconstruct the profiles of the individuals who contributed to the mix. And what kind of idiot would try to claim there is a partial match there? I mean, who in the world?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#253)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:18:04 AM EST
    Might involve more than that Lora, you are right. But, she had no evidence of anal trauma, so it doesn't look like that was getting regular use. It's possible I guess, but I didn't do the inspection, nor would I want to.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#254)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:25:22 AM EST
    Lora and Newport - Puleeese! I just had lunch!

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#255)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:26:17 AM EST
    All true Sundance. But, there is a point where imho strays away from her role of tester of the evidence into her role of attacker of innocent boys and defender of the indefensible hookers and DA. That is what causes some frustration. Also fool comments like James B. Shearer's cause some frustration. But, you are right, that on the whole imho has caused all reasonable challenges to the DA's case to be fleshed out and washed down the drain and I guess she will take some small solace in knowing that.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#256)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:33:36 AM EST
    "He's going down," is obviously my opinion. How could I be stating it as a fact when his trial isn't set for a week and a half? Here's what Newport said:
    Imho, as I have said many times before there should be no dispute that the FA had sex with at least 5 different men in the 3 days prior to the party.
    I have noticed he's toned it down a bit from a few weeks back:
    THe bottom line on this is that she had sex with at least 5 men and probably 7 men in the 3 days leading up to the LAX party.
    I didn't make any assumptions about how many drinks Finnerty had that night before the incident. There should be and there is dispute that she had sex with at least 5 different men in the 3 days prior to the party if you are talking about v@ginal sex. This by you follows:
    This info is much more pertinent to explain the diffuse edema than to whether Precious lied about her chastity.
    Not all "one on ones" involve v@ginal sex. Witness calls Reiner pimp
    Subpoenaed to testify in exchange for a promise that his testimony would not be used against him, Richard Emery told the court he first went to the Kittery brothel in the mid-1990s after hearing about it through "word of mouth."
    "I wanted to see if it was true what I was hearing about it," he said. "And I found out it was."
    The truth Emery was seeking came in the form of hand-to-genital gratification and cost him $150.
    Kevin Foley took the stand and told the court he purchased prostitution services at the Danish Health Club over the course of many years, and the women always initiated discussions about sex for cash.
    "I wouldn't feel up to asking a woman that," he said. "Most of the times, I would get oral sex, or intercourse, or both. The last few times, it was around $200 for oral and intercourse."


    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#257)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:42:03 AM EST
    IMHO - I know you to be a master of nuance, but Newport's comments are consistent. Was "word of mouth" a bad pun? Emery is a fool for overpaying by so much.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#258)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:44:32 AM EST
    Lora,
    Alternatively, the AV could have been examined by incompetent medical personnel.
    It has been explained previously how the night time photo's of a black person might not be the best source for determining whether bruising exists. Some old skin discolorations may appear to be fresh bruises when they are not. Unless you have some specific evidence to suggest the hospital personnel are incompetent, I would not believe medical incompetence here. Duke hospital is regarded is one of the top 5 in the United States, as is the medical school. Lora, you are ultimately going to have to accept that there are no photo's of the FA all beat up. If they existed Nifong would have filed a responsive pleading and attached the photo's. The defense attorneys also would not have petitioned the court to release the medical info to the public if such photo's were in the file.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#259)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:47:03 AM EST
    I suppose this is a question for any medical people out there, but would the hospital report identify obviously old bruises that are on their way out or only recent trauma that might support the alleged events?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#260)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:51:11 AM EST
    Also Lora, wouldn't man cousin Jack have released the photo's of his cousin to support her stories? How do you explain that?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#261)
    by Lora on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 09:55:32 AM EST
    Newport, We saw some of the photos. The defense described bruising. Sure looked like bruises to me. They were pretty large. Skin discolorations? That would be some huge amount of discoloration. I think not. And I agree, it is not likely that Duke medical personnel are incompetent, though you have to wonder about the SANE nurse in training. BTW, my prof got challenged in court on just that issue - was she capable as a white person of determining if the photos she took of an allegedly bruised African American were actually bruises or just skin discolorations? (They absolutely were bruises.) The case got dismissed, in part because of that challenge, ridiculous though it was. Sundance, sorry about the lunch. Here we go with this highly technical link. Although the purpose of this investigation was a little different, the investigators were sometimes able to recover sperm from women from up to 7 days following sexual intercourse. Highly complicated and boring article

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#262)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:00:44 AM EST
    Yeah, Madison, it does not seem to me that a mixed profile could ever yield a conclusive match. If a sample were mixed there would be no way to deconstruct the aleles back to their original source. Like if you have the following set of letters from two sources: Source One: A,C,F,G Source Two: B,D,A,B And your sample is mixed up to be: ABCDABFG There would be no way to deconstruct this sample back to match the orginal two sources. Right?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#263)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:02:38 AM EST
    Lora, could you provide a link to the pictures you have seen. I have not seen any pictures of the accuser that have any degree of clarity whatsoever.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#264)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:19:41 AM EST
    Sundance posted:
    IMHO - I know you to be a master of nuance, but Newport's comments are consistent.
    Two weeks back Newport was stating it as fact:
    THe bottom line on this is that she had sex with at least 5 men and probably 7 men in the 3 days leading up to the LAX party.
    Now he's hedging a bit:
    Imho, as I have said many times before there should be no dispute that the FA had sex with at least 5 different men in the 3 days prior to the party.
    It is my humble opinion that my scrutiny has had an effect on the way a few commenters make their arguments. I think noname's correction of Newport's assumption about Kim being in the bathroom during the attack is an example. Newport posted to noname after I thanked noname for correcting him:
    You should be really proud of yourself.
    naname replied:
    Ha! If I caught it just scimming the post, IMHO was bound to catch it soon enough.


    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#265)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:23:55 AM EST
    Lora, My snapshot collection is full of family photos taken at night which just didn't come out well. Flash photography is tricky, especially if you are just taking snapshots from a variety of distances in a variety of lighting conditions with a small handheld camera. Every seen a professional shoot under those conditions - they can take hours to light a scene. Newspeople do it more quickly because they carry cameras with very powerful flashes - they often aren't works of art, but at least they are lit up. Most personal cameras carry a tiny little flash. The results are rarely any good.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#266)
    by Lora on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:28:03 AM EST
    Newport, I don't have the link atm. They were on line several weeks back. I remember one of her lying down on the porch I believe, with bruise(s) showing on her thigh/hip up to the edge of her garment/whatever she was wearing. I think that picture has been described in one or more of the recent links here.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#267)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:36:10 AM EST
    SomeWhatChunky makes an excellent point about night time photography. It is very tricky indeed, and usually requires a tripod and very slow shutter to capture as much light as possible from the night time scene.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#268)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:38:34 AM EST
    That's not hedging imho, I just didn't feel like typing the rest, didn't feel it was worth it. I still think it likely.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#269)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:41:59 AM EST
    Yes, you are quite the little corrector, imho. Since you proved me wrong according to noname (who is a good guy) am I back on the Christmas card list?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#270)
    by Lora on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:44:26 AM EST
    Newport, From Pat's link 3 earlier this thread: (WRAL)
    12:37:58 a.m. The accuser is lying on her back on the back stairs. She has a cut on her right foot. She has cuts on her right butt cheek. The stair rail has pink spots on it.
    They don't mention bruises, but if it's the photo I recall, there were bruises too, or something that looked a lot like bruises. In any case, you'd think cuts on her "butt cheek" would have been recorded by somebody who was doing his/her job.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#271)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:44:57 AM EST
    Lora, I have seen all the photo's published by MSNBC as shown on Johnsville and you can't tell a damn thing about skin tone or discoloration from them. I do wonder what picture you saw.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#272)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:46:26 AM EST
    The pink spots are supposed to be nail polish. I don't know about cuts on butt cheeks.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#273)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:54:30 AM EST
    Newport, Most reasonable people would conclude that an outcall prostitute was selling intercourse most of the time. But, when you "just don't know" it is not the only possible conclusion. One of the common tactics of both AV supporters and a few others is to take every individual fact and look at it in isolation. When you don't have inconvertible proof of something, you can always dream up an alternate theory. Maybe a low probability theory, but one that "could" be true. The problem with that "speculative" approach is that a long series of specific low probability events has almost no chance of happening. Mathematically possible, but not realistic in the real world. Since most people don't understand statistics, if you focus the debate on one point at a time, you can make it seem like the point could be something else and thus imply it has no relevance. When a case hinges on one key point, maybe. But when there is a number of issues, none of which alone is crucial, it doesn't work as well. Though they may not get the statistics, most people, including fair juries, intuitively understand this in the real world. Maybe it's because as parents, most people have some experience dissecting such attempts to hide the truth. I have some childhood memories of justice being dished out, even though I thought my eloquence had "proved" my innocence beyond a reasonable doubt. But, to my dismay, mom and dad usually sorted through all the BS and got it right :) IMHO, a prime practicioner of this tactic, used to bother me as well. While she claims she has no agenda... well, form your own opinion on that one. But IMHO is an great reference source. Sometimes IMHO even brings up a good point. IMHO has toned down the "We just don't know" comments a great deal. MrPrecedent vanished. Both of these perhaps unrelated events occurred after a they were 'discussed" at length here. Though I hesitate to mention them as I fear that could cause them to come back. So I'd just counter ridiculous arguments with a simple rebuttal. There's no judge here, but there is a community which forms an opinion on the merits of varying positions over time. It gets sorted out.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#274)
    by wumhenry on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 10:55:47 AM EST
    IMHO:
    assumptions that her "dates" always include v@ginal sex with a man. According to her they do not. The one date about which we heard the particulars did not include it.
    You mean the "date" where she performed with a vibrator? How do you know that didn't involve vaginal sex? Do you recall seeing testimony that she did not insert the vibrator into her vagina? or testimony that the male customer did not insert his dick in her vagina before or afterward?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#275)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 11:00:24 AM EST
    Newport:
    The pink spots are supposed to be nail polish. I don't know about cuts on butt cheeks.
    Could the cuts on her rear end be nail polish as well? If it was wet enough to smear on the railings, it could have smeared on her rear when she fell and tried to break her fall. If the docs and nurses at the hospital found smeared pinkish-red nail polish on her buttocks, would they report it in the medical report?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#276)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 11:04:35 AM EST
    Somewhat, Funny thing is the tactics you describe are usually the work of defense attorneys defending indefensible clients. Here, it's the opposite, the supporters of the DA and the false charges attack every little thing and offer up wild speculation against the facts we do know. Pretty funny really and it says much about the lack of a case. Very good post.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#277)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 11:06:48 AM EST
    One Photo here While we may disagree what it shows, I think we can all agree the photo isn't going to win any awards for clarity.... And that is one of the best ones!

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#278)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 11:12:14 AM EST
    Mik, I don't know, but remember the SI article re the LAX players submitting to the photo ID where the Durham PD was measuring and marking 12 year old "scratches" on one of the players. I don't put much faith in what someone (even a defense attorney who may have wish he had kept his mouth shut on this one because he really didn't know what he was talking about) says about skin conditions in a dark photograph. I would think that if the accuser had a fresh cut on her butt cheek someone at Duke hospital would have noted it. After all, she was examined by a whole bunch of people and she was there a long time.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#279)
    by Lora on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 11:54:01 AM EST
    Thanks for the photo link, SomewhatChunky. Indeed I wouldn't want to swear to what any of it means. However, the dark areas, especially the roundish one on her upper arm, COULD be bruises. A very reasonable possibility. Another very reasonable possibility is shadow.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#280)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 12:48:21 PM EST
    IMHO seems to have said:
    assumptions that her "dates" always include v@ginal sex with a man. According to her they do not. The one date about which we heard the particulars did not include it.
    Hmmm, which date was that? The stripping engagement? Perhaps it was the date where Jariel Johnson reported that the AV said that she used a small [redacted]. In that case, perhaps that was what was novel about that date and it stuck in his memory. No where have we seen a statement from the AV that her "one-on-one" dates did not include vaginal sex, and I think we are entitled to assume that they did. Grown men don't pay money to women to play pat-a-cake.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#281)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 01:35:44 PM EST
    Going down Melody Lane: We don't know how many "dates" the AV had in the week before the Buchanan party. And we don't know how many customers chose or*l v. g*nital. We do know what the coin of the realm was for the AV paying her "drivers" (which reminds me of an old blues song appropriate here, "I Wanna Be Your Driver"), and since they were checking for their DNA someone expected "traces of love," as The Classics IV used to sing. I would hope that the AV did some sort of cleanup downstairs after her workday and I hope the customers all used condoms, but just the physical action of a member thrusting in and out would tend to pull out sperm already in there (isn't nature ingenious?). If the AV's precious place was so hospitable to sperm that her boyfriend's offering stayed there for eight days with so much competing traffic, it's hard to believe that no trace of DNA from the three rapists survived a few hours in such a nurturing environment. In short, the boyfriend backdating his deposit slip is bogus and will surely be one of the funny moments we can expect to see on the stand. If it weren't ruining three innocent lives I would agree with PB that we should have the trial. It will be a hoot.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#282)
    by Alan on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 01:41:11 PM EST
    beenaround posted:
    Grown men don't pay money to women to play pat-a-cake.
    Source? Pat-a-cake may be unusually popular among the demographic you name. Your source will also need to explain why the AV looked wistful and described her occupation as 'not the best job in the world' to the News and Observer. Does the AV not enjoy pat-a-cake? We just don't know.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#283)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:13:04 PM EST
    Alan, if you play pat-a-cake, or as those of us who grew up in New Jersey called it, "pattycake," for forty hours a week you can suffer repetitive stress injuries to the hands and wrists. One can understand the AV's desire to find other, better employment.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#284)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:24:42 PM EST
    So, I'm a physician and have performed quite a few rape kits in my day. To answer some of the questions, whoever performs a rape kit (in this case a SANE nurse in training) must record EVERYTHING they find on exam--bruises, old bruises, nail polish on the butt, etc. What they may not report would be old, healed scars or skin discoloration. This is important because it's very possible that something that looks like a bruise in a photograph, particularly on black skin, may be an old scar. It's also important to know that we are instructed to NOT do any alcohol or toxicology testing on rape victims, as it may be used against them in court. So unless someone is very ill and the doctor needs to determine why, it's rare that any sort of alcohol or drug testing would be done, as is the case in this situation. i will say in my experience that it is virtually impossible to have anal rape without some sort of tearing or ripping. This is one of the main problems in the accuser's story, because if she lied about the anal rape I believe she lied about the vaginal and oral rape. Also, one last point. We know the accuser had vaginal sex with at least 3 men in the days leading up to the supposed rape because she finally told the prosecuter about them when the semen found in her didn't match any of the players. They got DNA at that point from the three men she had had sex with in the previous few days--or at least the three she admitted to...

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#285)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:28:43 PM EST
    Newport, Thank you for proving my point. Newport posted:
    That's not hedging imho, I just didn't feel like typing the rest, didn't feel it was worth it. I still think it likely.
    I also think it's likely, but WE DON'T KNOW. Newport, two weeks back you were stating it as fact: THe bottom line on this is that she had sex with at least 5 men and probably 7 men in the 3 days leading up to the LAX party. SomewhatChunky has noticed I haven't been using the phrase WE DON'T KNOW as much. I haven't had to. Some posters are more careful when they make their arguments. That's a good thing. Sundance posted:
    Newport, you seem to be getting frustrated lately. IMHO's contributions to the discussions have been very valuable, I think, although insanely frustrating me at times. Having gone through all that is known and supposed, having reviewed from any and all possible angles, having required proof and sources for verification, I reach a conclusion at the end of the path knowing that any and all rocks have been turned over, examined, and considered. Thus, I have a high degree of confidence, as well as knowing where the gaps in the critical analysis are.
    You're welcome.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#286)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:37:57 PM EST
    fahrenam posted:
    i will say in my experience that it is virtually impossible to have anal rape without some sort of tearing or ripping. This is one of the main problems in the accuser's story, because if she lied about the anal rape I believe she lied about the vaginal and oral rape.
    Does your experience include victims who have very regular anal sex? Would that make a difference? Do people who engage in consensual anal sex on a regular basis experience ripping or tearing every time they do so? Forced anal sex does not need to be physically violent. fahrenam posted:
    Also, one last point. We know the accuser had vaginal sex with at least 3 men in the days leading up to the supposed rape because she finally told the prosecuter about them when the semen found in her didn't match any of the players. They got DNA at that point from the three men she had had sex with in the previous few days--or at least the three she admitted to...
    The most recent intercourse I heard she related was one week. Do you know of any other instances of v@ginal sex she related to the investigators?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#287)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:41:34 PM EST
    beenaround posted:
    No where have we seen a statement from the AV that her "one-on-one" dates did not include vaginal sex, and I think we are entitled to assume that they did. Grown men don't pay money to women to play pat-a-cake.
    Grown men pay to be gratified by means other than v@ginal sex. It is a fact. Assume away, beenaround, just don't state your assumptions as fact.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#288)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:41:39 PM EST
    Imho, why do you continue to twist what I said, it is not becoming. When I said this: Newport posted: That's not hedging imho, I just didn't feel like typing the rest, didn't feel it was worth it. I still think it likely. You know I was referring to the 7 men, i.e., the part of my original statement that I did not repeat for the reasons given. Why do you feel the need to distort this it apply my explanation to the first part of my statement re the 5 men. I do not think that "likely" I think that Precious almost certainly had sex with at least 5 men in the 3 days prior to the party: Johnson, Murchison, the older gentlemen, and 3 other hotel dates described by Johnson.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#289)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:42:44 PM EST
    Lora posted:
    Thanks for the photo link, SomewhatChunky. Indeed I wouldn't want to swear to what any of it means. However, the dark areas, especially the roundish one on her upper arm, COULD be bruises. A very reasonable possibility. Another very reasonable possibility is shadow.
    I think a more likely cause is digital artifacts. I put the photo (which is only a few inches in size) into photoshop and enlarged it about 10 times. When you do that, you can see the "dark spot" on the upper arm is actually part of a blotch which extends from the back side of her shoulder all the way down to her elbow and around her arm. It's huge - no way that whole area is a bruise that everyone missed. The same pattern is on the upper and back side of her leg. If you look closely, you can see all of this in the small photo as well. This could have been caused by the light reflecting off of the house or just shadows. Most camera have automatic meters which try to "guess" the right exposure, but they have to make choices based on the spots in the pciture they focus on (usually the center) and these choices often screw up part of the picture. I have tons of experience taking screwed up pictures :) I know my cell phone takes really poor pictures while my 35MM digital SLR takes great shots. The little hand held ones are in between. I'm sure a pro could enahnce this better than I, but that's what I see.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#290)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:43:36 PM EST
    Throw in Taylor during the fashion show and there's 6. Throw in one of the two at the vibrator extravaganva and you got 7.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#291)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:47:49 PM EST
    cib posted:
    Somewhat Chunky: One of the best most astute posts I've seen on these threads. I'm surprised IMHO didn't pick up on it, since she is pretty obsessive about this case. Busy chasing the little IMHOrugrats around the couch, I suppose.
    I don't have rugrats to chase around the couch. I wish I did. I'm sure the men and women who read and comment here who do care for their little ones will appreciate that their doing so is your idea of fodder for an insult.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#292)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:49:13 PM EST
    Two points, IMHO. Even in people who engage in frequent anal sex you would expect to see some signs of trauma in an anal rape, unless the rapist took plenty of time to allow for dilation of the rectum and probably used lubrication. That rarely happens in anal rape and in this case the timeline just doesn't seem to allow it. Even then you would expect to see something unless the woman relaxed and "allowed" the rape to happen. Otherwise the clenching of the sphincter would prevent the dilation. In terms of the comment about sex one week prior, usually pathologists can tell from the appearance of the sperm how long it has been around. My understanding about the sperm that was found in the acccuser's vagina was that it was approxiamtely 0-3 days old, based on the appearance. After a few days the head separates from the tail (which is why you can only get pregnant if you have sex within 1-3 days of ovulation. Even if it hangs around after that point it is incapable of impregnating the woman, but its source may be identifiable. I can't remember exactly where I heard the discussion on the age of the sperm found, but I believe it was on Nancy Grace.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#293)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:50:13 PM EST
    What an excellent point fahrenam;
    Also, one last point. We know the accuser had vaginal sex with at least 3 men in the days leading up to the supposed rape because she finally told the prosecuter about them when the semen found in her didn't match any of the players. They got DNA at that point from the three men she had had sex with in the previous few days--or at least the three she admitted to...
    And the three would be Johnson, Taylor and Murchison. They would not be able to get DNA from the johns. We got two pimps and the "boyfriend." This shows my recent post where I named names and included Taylor was on the money.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#294)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:52:48 PM EST
    imho postulated,
    Does your experience include victims who have very regular anal sex? Would that make a difference? Do people who engage in consensual anal sex on a regular basis experience ripping or tearing every time they do so? Forced anal sex does not need to be physically violent.
    Source? Or are you speaking from experience.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#295)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:53:29 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    I do not think that "likely" I think that Precious almost certainly had sex with at least 5 men in the 3 days prior to the party: Johnson, Murchison, the older gentlemen, and 3 other hotel dates described by Johnson.
    Newport, that is a change from when you used to state it as a fact. Thank you for making my point (again). Why fight it? It's a good thing. I'm proud of you. The blog is better for it.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#296)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 02:55:05 PM EST
    cib posted:
    Somewhat Chunky: One of the best most astute posts I've seen on these threads. I'm surprised IMHO didn't pick up on it, since she is pretty obsessive about this case. Busy chasing the little IMHOrugrats around the couch, I suppose.
    Thanks. IMHO picks up on mosts things. She just rarely posts the ones that seem to favor the defense ( My post attacked Kim's credibility.) If IMHO wants to approach the case that way, that's fine with me.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#297)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:00:02 PM EST
    fahrenam, excellent posts and the one yesterday was very good as well. I think you put to bed the question of why no toxicology report, which was the source of much misinformation. You also put to bed the notion of anal rape without visible trauma and explained quite nicely what doctors do and don't report.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#298)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:08:47 PM EST
    IMHO, I don't feel the need to put qualifiers in front of every argument I make. People here can tell what I am saying and judge the level of certainty for themselves. You will never see me put sayings like "in my humble opinion" in front of anything I write because people reading this already know that.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#299)
    by weezie on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:09:01 PM EST
    After a week at the beach, I've been catching up with all of you. I was amazed at how much free time I had away from the computer. Actually read three books! One new observation here though, Newport, you've never said, "GTHC, GTH"? Wow, you are one cool and composed character. We're considering having it tattooed on our keisters if we can get a family discount. Just kidding localone...

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#300)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:09:23 PM EST
    beenaround
    No where have we seen a statement from the AV that her "one-on-one" dates did not include vaginal sex, and I think we are entitled to assume that they did. Grown men don't pay money to women to play pat-a-cake.
    Are you saying that it is very likely these "dates" included vaginal sex, or that we can treat it as fact? While I would agree vaginal sex was likely (I too would tend to assume it until I hear differently), there certainly other possibilities (oral, fetish play, ect.).

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#301)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:16:43 PM EST
    imho, ever in search of knowledge, asks: Does your experience include victims who have very regular an*l sex? By asking this question, imho tries to open up the possibility that the AV has "very regular an*l sex." Of course, there is absolutely no evidence of that. It's just another invention of imho just to throw water on fahrenam's informed comments. The AV's story is that she was struggling furiously against the gang rape. Anyone who's been in a fight, whether or not it involved an*l rape, knows how one's sphincter tightens up. It's a natural part of the fight or flight reaction. As the vernacular goes, you get "uptight." More utter BS from imho who apparently has never been uptight. And is seldom out of sight either.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#302)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:24:00 PM EST
    Weezie, what's GTH and what's the best place to visit in coastal Carolina? Or would coastal SC be better?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#303)
    by weezie on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:26:04 PM EST
    Tortured reach for a punchline so how about vodka tonic time on the east coast.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#304)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:27:26 PM EST
    Weezie, never mind I get the second part now. Just goes to show I don't really say things like that. I have a healthy respect for Carolina athletes and always root for the ACC. Would like to know about best place on the coast though.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#305)
    by weezie on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:33:22 PM EST
    Sorry Newport, GTH is "Go to Hell," as in GTHC, GTH. If you want wide beaches, try Hilton Head in SC. Long, big surf: Nags Head in NC, but beware the drop off and riptides. Figure Eight Island in NC is lovely and has more control over development. Big old sand flies: Hatteras Island if the wind blows from the west, otherwise very nice, too. Pricewise, NC is cheaper.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#306)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:42:06 PM EST
    The FA really overtold her story. By throwing in the anal rape, forced oral copulation, and all the choking and beating stuff this was probably her way of telling such a fantastic tale that she thought no one would ever believe her. Unfortunately, enter Mike Nifong who wanted to believe her. I am starting to soften on the FA. She was likely forced to make the ID's by Nifong and DPD. She probably didn't want to do that. I think that Sarcastic's approach may be right for the FA. I have changed my mind. Nifong represents the true evil here, the FA is just mentally ill and needs help in the form of a lengthy involuntary commitment.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#307)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:44:33 PM EST
    Thanks Weezie, I am going to print your answer out. I am thinking of making a trip.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#308)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:46:51 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    You will never see me put sayings like "in my humble opinion" in front of anything I write because people reading this already know that.
    They know that you never state anything that is a verified fact unless you qualify it as such? You should have clued me onto that a long time ago. I disclaimer would be nice for readers that are not aware that you state things as fact that are not necessarily facts.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#309)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:48:40 PM EST
    Newport - I wouldn't soften on the AV too much. If it turns out she lied, then she deserves to be punished. Just keep the image in your head of her picking Finnerty in the line-up and throwing in some tears for effect if that helps.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#310)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:49:19 PM EST
    noname posted:
    Are you saying that it is very likely these "dates" included vaginal sex, or that we can treat it as fact? While I would agree vaginal sex was likely (I too would tend to assume it until I hear differently), there certainly other possibilities (oral, fetish play, ect.)
    Yep.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#311)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:49:45 PM EST
    It's all readily apparent from the context imho. In my humbile opinion, are you sure you are not uptight?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#312)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 03:53:25 PM EST
    imho posted:
    Forced anal sex does not need to be physically violent.
    Newport posted:
    Source? Or are you speaking from experience.
    My source is the statutes Lora and others haved posted here.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#313)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:03:00 PM EST
    IMHO:
    Does your experience include victims who have very regular anal sex? Would that make a difference? Do people who engage in consensual anal sex on a regular basis experience ripping or tearing every time they do so? Forced anal sex does not need to be physically violent.
    Would it seem strange to you that there was swelling of the vagina but not the anus in this case?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#314)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:11:31 PM EST
    IMHO - just caught up. I'm sorry, I didn't realize that expressed gratitude for your contributions was expected. I thought that the comment and the implied compliment would suffice. So thank you, and I apologize for the wrongful neglect.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#315)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:14:50 PM EST
    Newport - don't you live in Newport Beach, CA? Why would you be looking to fly across the country to visit a beach. Water too cold over there?

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#317)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:17:54 PM EST
    fahrenam posted:
    Two points, IMHO. Even in people who engage in frequent anal sex you would expect to see some signs of trauma in an anal rape, unless the rapist took plenty of time to allow for dilation of the rectum and probably used lubrication. That rarely happens in anal rape and in this case the timeline just doesn't seem to allow it. Even then you would expect to see something unless the woman relaxed and "allowed" the rape to happen. Otherwise the clenching of the sphincter would prevent the dilation.
    We don't know what the prosecution timeline is or for what time frame Finnerty is alibied. She may have capitualted to avoid injury. There is mention of KY Jelly in the search warrant. It may be the product itself or a photograph of the product that was listed as seized. fahrenam posted:
    In terms of the comment about sex one week prior, usually pathologists can tell from the appearance of the sperm how long it has been around. My understanding about the sperm that was found in the acccuser's vagina was that it was approxiamtely 0-3 days old, based on the appearance. After a few days the head separates from the tail (which is why you can only get pregnant if you have sex within 1-3 days of ovulation. Even if it hangs around after that point it is incapable of impregnating the woman, but its source may be identifiable. I can't remember exactly where I heard the discussion on the age of the sperm found, but I believe it was on Nancy Grace.
    Test: Boyfriend likely sperm source
    However, the director of the private laboratory in Burlington that conducted the test said it is impossible to pinpoint when the woman had sex.
    "In general, if we test a vaginal swab, there's no way to determine how old the semen is on that swab," said Brian Meehan, laboratory director of DNA Security Inc. Meehan would not discuss the tests conducted in the lacrosse investigation.
    As a rule of thumb, live sperm cells can live inside the body for 48 to 72 hours after sex, said Marcia Eisenberg, technical director for Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings, a forensic identity lab. Even after the sperm cells die, it is possible to extract DNA from fluid left in the body.
    I read a blog where they said a defense attorney claimed the semen was fresh, but I couldn't find a source. Dan Abrams may know.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#318)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 04:18:14 PM EST
    noname asks:
    beenaround
    No where have we seen a statement from the AV that her "one-on-one" dates did not include vaginal sex, and I think we are entitled to assume that they did. Grown men don't pay money to women to play pat-a-cake.
    Are you saying that it is very likely these "dates" included vaginal sex, or that we can treat it as fact? While I would agree vaginal sex was likely (I too would tend to assume it until I hear differently), there certainly other possibilities (oral, fetish play, ect.).
    I am saying that the AV has not told us anywhere that her "one-on-ones" did not include vaginal sex, so I think we can assume that many did. Of course there are other forms of sexual activity that she would engage in, and to be sure what the mix was we would have to see her fee structure and income levels. Perhaps at trial she will tell us.

    Re: Suspended Duke Player Reinstated (none / 0) (#316)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 01, 2006 at 08:54:14 PM EST
    Time for a new thread everyone. Colin Finnerty's passed polygraph, and the evidence his parents say he has establishing his innocence. Comments are closing here.