home

Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread

Here's an open thread dedicated to the Duke Lacrosse case.

Newsweek has a very detailed 8 page recap of events in the Duke Lacrosse players alleged rape case. If you don't have time to read the whole thing, here are the highlights I found significant. First, the article puts Reade Seligman's alibi defense in a clear and concise nutshell.

Photos taken by a partygoer and viewed by NEWSWEEK show the alleged victim, an exotic dancer, ending a brief performance for the team at 12:03 a.m. Between 12:05 and 12:24 a.m., Seligmann dialed at least eight separate calls on his cell phone. A taxi driver said that he had picked up Seligmann and another friend, who were laughing and joking, at about 12:19, and took them to an ATM (where Seligmann swiped his card), to a fast-food restaurant and then to his dorm, where Seligmann swiped in at 12:46 a.m. In other words, it would seem Seligmann must have committed a sex crime in less than two minutes or while he was on the phone.

As to Finnerty:

Defense lawyers were broadly hinting that the second defendant, Collin Finnerty, had left the party before the dance even began. Both men's lawyers maintain their clients are innocent.

Also an interesting note about Finnerty's prior arrest for assault -- he was neither charged nor convicted of any crime:

Finnerty agreed to perform community service to avoid being formally charged.

There's a bit of a different version of the first round of DNA tests:

Defense lawyer Bill Thomas told NEWSWEEK that in the first round some DNA showed up under the woman's fingernails, though tests were inconclusive about identity.

Clearing up some timeline details:

According to a timeline put out by defense lawyers, one exotic dancer, Kim Roberts, 31, appeared on time, but another dancer, who was dropped off by a car, arrived a half hour late.

On the drinks provided:

According to Roberts, who was interviewed last week by NEWSWEEK, the boys gave each of them mixed drinks. Roberts says she did not drink hers, but the other dancer did, knocking her cup over after finishing half her drink, then imbibing Roberts's.

On the broom:

All sides agree that one of the partygoers called out to the women asking if they had brought any sex toys. According to defense lawyers, there was some anatomically crude banter between one of the women and the audience, but then one of the boys, holding a broom handle, yelled out, "Use this!" That was enough for Roberts; she and the other woman ended the show. A photo taken at 12:03 shows the dancers turning away; the boys no longer look happy.

There's a lot on the politics of the case, particularly involving Kim Roberts' lawyer, Mark Simeon and the DA. They used to be adversaries, not any more. Simeon is now supporting Nifong in the May 2 election.

Nifong was the protégé of Simeon's rival in the 2002 race for D.A. Simeon and Nifong did not get along, according to Simeon....On March 28--the day after Nifong first spoke out in the Duke case, publicly chastising the players for not coming forward to volunteer information about the alleged rape--Simeon told Nifong he would support him. He invited Nifong to speak at his church...

....That was on April 9. A week later Simeon asked Nifong to go to court to relieve Kim of the obligation of paying the bail-bond fees, arguing that she was no longer a "flight risk." Nifong agreed, as did the judge. Simeon told NEWSWEEK he went before the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People, a very influential group, and urged them to vote for Nifong. Simeon says he has also been giving Nifong fashion advice, telling him to lose the plaid shirts and to start wearing black suits, light shirts and power ties. Women like power, Simeon says he told Nifong.

On Nifong's refusal to consider exculpatory information provided by the defense:

On April 13, Nifong met with three defense lawyers, Bill Thomas, Butch Williams and Wade Smith. According to Williams, when the lawyers got into exculpatory evidence, like the photos, Nifong essentially cut them off, saying that he knew much more about the case than they would ever know, and that he intended to indict two players.

Dumbest media comment by anyone uninvolved in the case so far: A college student at Central, the college attended by the accuser, told Newsweek:

Chan Hall, 22, said, "It's the same old story. Duke up, Central down." Hall said he wanted to see the Duke students prosecuted "whether it happened or not. It would be justice for things that happened in the past."

I sure hope that kid doesn't get a job in the criminal justice system after graduation.

This is an open thread on all aspects of the case.

Late night updates: There are some very interesting comments on the case at the Dell Gines blog, which is written by an African American male.

La Shawn Barber:

cop arrives and sees drunk woman passed out, drunk woman is taken to a "substance abuse" center, realizes she may be in big trouble because of her past drunken criminal behavior (leading police on a car chase and trying to run down an officer), claims rape, is sent to hospital where exam reveals injuries "consistent" with rape, points the finger at three men at the party, media and black "leaders" go crazy and play up race angle, DA - in a fight for political survival - takes the race bait and vilifies 46 men, some of whom weren't at the party, tests all but the black player, and despite no evidence charges two men with rape.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

Thread now closed and continued here.

< Transcript Details of Duke Accuser Photo Lineup | LA Times: Dump Cheney and Rumsfeld >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 11:42:02 AM EST
    Between 12:05 and 12:24 a.m., Seligmann dialed at least eight separate calls on his cell phone. That's pretty underwhelming, unless the defense has witnesses actually speaking to Seligmann via phone. Otherwise, anyone could have been in possession of Seligmann's phone at the time. "Lemme borrow your cell", words apparently unimaginable to the credulous Newsweek reporter (I don't blame the defense atty for playing him, that's what they're paid for).

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 11:47:46 AM EST
    Alibis: TL said:
    Between 12:05 and 12:24 a.m., Seligmann dialed at least eight separate calls on his cell phone. A taxi driver said that he had picked up Seligmann and another friend, who were laughing and joking, at about 12:19, and took them to an ATM (where Seligmann swiped his card), to a fast-food restaurant and then to his dorm, where Seligmann swiped in at 12:46 a.m. In other words, it would seem Seligmann must have committed a sex crime in less than two minutes or while he was on the phone.
    If this is true, then this would pretty much clear Seligmann from a rape. But again if Seligmann was ID'd with 100% certainty, and he is cleared, then this goes to the credibility of the accuser. He was the guy she said she performed oral sex on, he was the guy in the front, sh had to have a good look at this guy. On Finnerty, if in fact he left the party before any dancing took place, then he needs to show something as to where he was. I think we would of heard this by now, unless the defense has decided to hold on to this trump card for later. DNA: TL said:
    Defense lawyer Bill Thomas told NEWSWEEK that in the first round some DNA showed up under the woman's fingernails, though tests were inconclusive about identity.
    Whose DNA is this? If its not one of the players then whose is it? Would this not be reason for the DA to make this investigation deeper than just looking at the players? Shouldnt this lead him to investigate the actions of the accuser earlier in that evening?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 11:50:30 AM EST
    That's pretty underwhelming, unless the defense has witnesses actually speaking to Seligmann via phone. Otherwise, anyone could have been in possession of Seligmann's phone at the time.
    This is overwhelming evidence actually. Because of the witness that will corroborate that they spoke to him. Also what about after 12:19 to 12:25, the cab driver can say if he used his cp or not. Because he was in his cab at that time. This guys alibi is vry strong. While not airtight, its sealed pretty good.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 11:50:53 AM EST
    Supamike, just to be clear, those are quotes from Newsweek, not my writing.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 11:58:19 AM EST
    Newsweek:
    DNA showed up under the woman's fingernails, though tests were inconclusive about identity.
    From an earlier thread:
    Inconclusive results indicate that DNA testing did not produce information that would allow an individual to be either included or excluded as the source of the biological evidence
    Presumably the reason why DNA results are inconclusive is that there is insufficient DNA present on the swab(s) tested. Because if sufficient DNA is present in the sample, comparison with another individual's DNA can match them or exclude them. So in this case, if the DNA evidence is indeed inconclusive, doesn't that mean that the swabs taken from the accuser's body contained no evidence of her having been assaulted -- not just by any one of the the boys whose DNA samples were taken for comparison purposes, but by anyone else either?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 12:16:52 PM EST
    Because of the witness that will corroborate that they spoke to him. Right, if they have such a witness. But the Newsweek story gives no indication that they do, and appears to rely on the phone records. The passage in question even omits mention of whether any of the attempts ("dialed at least 8 separate calls") were successful.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by Aaron on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 12:22:08 PM EST
    If the initial DNA tests were inconclusive and further DNA tests are expected to be completed in a couple of weeks, assuming the problem is with the quantity of DNA collected, presumably the DNA is being cloned in advance of the additional testing (hence the delay). If I were a juror, I wouldn't find the argument, "Maybe he lent somebody his cell phone, got it back to call a cab and go to the ATM, and perhaps then lent it to somebody again" to be very compelling. Unless, that is, the prosecution produced the borrower.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 12:31:45 PM EST
    One dancer says there was a rape. The other dancer doesn't know. It's a small house. If a rape happened, it seems some of the other people there must know. All of the public information I have read about direct or indirect statements from the players who were there says no rape ocurred. The three captains talked with the cops at length the night in question. Since then they aren't talking. The DA doesn't seem that interested in what the defense has to say. If you thought the DA was playing "pick a rapist, here are your 45 choices" you wouldn't let your client talk at this point either. I played lacrosse in college and on numerous other teams before and after college. While it easy to imagine a few guys on any team commiting the acts with which they are charged, I find it hard to believe that all of the team members would stand around around and let a violent rape occur or even particpate in a cover-up. I think that as a whole, college students don't think drinking or partying is inherently wrong. They know rape is. These are not all evil guys and they know right from wrong. Is hiring a stripper wrong? Maybe. Ask your male friends how many of them have been to an event with a stripper at some point in their life and you might be surprised. The internet is full of "escort" services. Someone hires them. While it is true that fifteen of the players had been cited for drinking, public urination etc... these are the acts that frequently occur with a group of rowdy college guys. A far far stretch to extrapolate that into serious crimes such as rape or murder. If I have to take the word of one against the word of many, I'm going with the many in this case. Unless the other guys there didn't know which is possible. I hope some physical evidence or other information comes forward that brings resolution to this case which is clear to most - the racial and class aspects have made people take sides who might normally be more open-minded.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 01:14:03 PM EST
    Great post, Somewhat Chunky, thanks for injecting some reason into the analysis.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 01:33:49 PM EST
    From the News and Observer April 21, 2006:
    While driving Seligmann home, Mostafa received a call at 12:29 a.m. from the cell phone of lacrosse player Tony McDevitt, requesting another ride from the party, the records show.
    FOX NEWS April 21, 2006
    Mostafa told MSNBC that he returned to the house later to pick up another customer. He told FOX News that when he arrived at the house the second time, some players were on the front lawn and a light-skinned black woman was walking away from the house. She was arguing with the players, then Mostafa said the woman said, "I am going to call the police."
    Four of the lacrosse players then got into the cab; Mostafa described them as agitated. He then heard one player say to another, "don't worry, she's just a stripper." He also said, "it look to me like somebody get hurt. But what kind of harm ... I have no idea."
    Seligmann and Tony McDevitt

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by chew2 on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 01:41:26 PM EST
    Great post, Somewhat Chunky, thanks for injecting some reason into the analysis.
    Shorter Chunky: I'm a white male ex Lax player. I'll take the word of many drunken Lax players over that of one (drunken/drugged) woman accuser. Never mind that they have refused to cooperate with the police and tell what happened at the party. Only denials and crafted statements from their lawyers. (3 players spoke to the police, but then crammed up. We don't know what they told the police. Only crafted statements by their lawyers. Since then, the blue wall of silence.)

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by chew2 on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 01:43:40 PM EST
    WOW! Those pics of McDevitt and Seligman!! A certain similarity.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 01:49:59 PM EST
    Is it illegal to hire a stripper?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by ding7777 on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 01:53:41 PM EST
    If Clinton could talk on the phone to Congressman "Sonny" Callahanto while being fellated by Monica, Seligmann could have (speed) dialed 8 phone numbers, while the accuser performed oral sex on him.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 01:55:33 PM EST
    Aaron posted:
    If I were a juror, I wouldn't find the argument, "Maybe he lent somebody his cell phone, got it back to call a cab and go to the ATM, and perhaps then lent it to somebody again" to be very compelling. Unless, that is, the prosecution produced the borrower.
    It's not like they are random calls. It can be determined to whom the calls were made, if they answered and talked to Reade or someone else, or if Reade or someone else left a message on their voice mail.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:01:06 PM EST
    supamike asked:
    Is it illegal to hire a stripper?
    Depends what you're hiring him for. To kill someone? Yes.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:06:35 PM EST
    This comment makes sense to me:
    However the Duke lacrosse rape case turns out, one lesson that absolutely will not be learned is this: You can severely reduce your chances of having a false accusation of rape leveled against you if you don't hire strange women to come to your house and take their clothes off for money. Also, you can severely reduce your chances of being raped if you do not go to strange men's houses and take your clothes off for money. (Does anyone else detect a common thread here?) And if you are a girl in Aruba or New York City, among the best ways to avoid being the victim of a horrible crime is to not get drunk in public or go off in a car with men you just met. While we're on the subject of things every 5-year-old should know, I also recommend against dousing yourself in gasoline and striking a match. Everyone makes mistakes, especially young people, but the outpouring of support for the victims and their families is obscuring what ought to be a flashing neon warning for potential future victims.
    How unexpected to agree with Ann Coulter, whom I otherwise despise...

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:12:41 PM EST
    If Clinton could talk on the phone to Congressman "Sonny" Callahanto while being fellated by Monica, Seligmann could have (speed) dialed 8 phone numbers, while the accuser performed oral sex on him.
    But the accuser's claim is that she was being held down by two other players--so such a theory would assume that those on the other end of these calls could hear nothing of the struggle. That doesn't seem likely. Seligmann's case seems so strong at this point--I wonder how a judge could ever allow it to go to trial.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by january on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:22:09 PM EST
    Never mind that they have refused to cooperate with the police and tell what happened at the party. Only denials and crafted statements from their lawyers. (3 players spoke to the police, but then crammed up. We don't know what they told the police. Only crafted statements by their lawyers. Since then, the blue wall of silence.)
    Chewy, this is an old gripe. If I'd been accused of a crime of this magnitude, guilty or innocent, you can bet I'd have hired an attorney, and you can also bet I'd be following his/her advice. Snarking at the lacrosse team for doing exactly that is just petty.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by ding7777 on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:25:54 PM EST
    khartoum, it doesn't say Seligmann talked to anyone... it just says he "dialed" 8 different numbers

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:28:21 PM EST
    Chew2 I think this "blue wall of silence" stuff is a lot of bunk. Initially they DID cooperate with the police. Before they had lawyers the 3 captains talked to the cops and even offered to take a polygraph test. Maybe WE don't know what they told them, but the DA does. If he wanted to tell the public he could. He has not. It probably doesn't back up his case or we would have seen it in the indictments. At some point soon he has to turn over his evidence to the defense, but we are not there yet. Those who keep saying they haven't talked really seem to just not like what they've had to say. Whether it is correct or not, the perception in this case that many have is that the DA has made up his mind. It certainly seems so by his actions and public statements. He has refused to meet with defense lawyers who have evidence they'd like to discuss. Why - he could certainly listen, thank them and send them on their way. This is now a political case and well publicized case. Factors which usually don't come into play are now in play. Like everyone else involved, the DA is subject to these forces. In this situation, any good lawyer would tell you to shutup. See how it plays out. Speak when the time is right. My take is that anything they say now is only going to be heard again if it can be used against them. Not to mention the fact that a third person is likely to be charged and nobody knows who that is. If a rape didn't happen (and you know or believe that) then you are already convinced the DA is out of control. Who would want to talk to him now - you could end up being #3. Unless the accuser recants, this case is going to take a long time to get resolved. All of the evidence and witnesses will eventully come out on both sides. And yes, when you have lots of witnesses, all else being equal, I'd usually go with the many over the one. My personal experience on many lacrosse teams (and yes, I'm white) leads me to believe that there wouldn't be an orchestrated cover-up of a serious crime. The bonds aren't that strong and other members of each player's circle (friends, relatives etc...) would urge them to do the right thing.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Lora on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 03:05:27 PM EST
    OK, time for a little different reasoning. It is not a big stretch to think that many players had been drinking that night. Alcohol clouds judgment and perception. It is not a big stretch to think that the party could have been a tad noisy, covering up noise of a struggle. Hence, a rape involving four people in a closed room, unnoticed by other partygoers is also not a big stretch. There is no reason that other people in the house "must" have noticed anything. Alcohol also relaxes inhibition. It is also common knowledge that people do things under the influence that they wouldn't normally do. A high percentage of sexual assault crimes involve alcohol. Again, it's not a huge stretch to think that normally decent young men might do things while drinking that they would never do sober. The other thing no one is dealing with is what these young men believe constitutes rape. (Note: I am not saying they did it. This is an "IF they did it" comment.) Now, they may have felt entitled to sex, due to having hired strippers from an escort service and having paid good money for their services, so they may have had coerced sex but not considered it rape. And...the cell phone record is leaving me as unconvinced as the pictures. Anybody ever see cell phones laying around and friends using them? I have. It's no big deal. It is mildly supportive of his alibi but it's not ironclad by a long shot. The sample of DNA, if it is not the dancer's, from the dancer's fingernail supports her story of being the recipient of violence and fighting back. And...where was the fingernail found? The bathroom, no? Again, not proof, but...supportive. One piece of the article is either missing or I just didn't see it. The time period between when the police showed up at the store and when the dancer arrived at the hospital seems to be missing. There is merely a statement about going to a D&A place first, and then the hospital, but there's a gap. If anyone has a link for that I'd appreciate it.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 03:31:53 PM EST
    Hi Lora, The police officer arrived at Krogers about 1:30 a.m. He took her to the "substance-abuse center" (drunk tank). It is there she reported the rape. She was taken to was taken to the Duke University hospital at 2:31 a.m.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 03:31:53 PM EST
    Anybody ever see cell phones laying around and friends using them? I have. It's no big deal. It is mildly supportive of his alibi but it's not ironclad by a long shot. But the problem is one of those calls was to his girlfriend, and one of them was to a cab company that came and picked him up about 5 minutes later. So at least two of the early phone calls were him, and even if he left his phone at the party and the later calls are somebody else, who cares? He's gone at that point. The case against Seiglemann seems dead at this point. If a crime really was committed (which looks doubtful at this point) the DA screwed up big time. By not checking out the defense alibi he indicted an innocent guy, and the credibility of his whole case is now in the toliet.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 03:45:44 PM EST
    Isn't there a war on?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 03:49:13 PM EST
    That would explain the Blue Wall's "Loose Lips Sink Ships" campaign.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 04:21:45 PM EST
    I could probably go find this out myself, but I figure someone here already knows: Do we know the time yet of each of the phone calls and who they were to? Like someone said he called his girlfriend and the cab. I think I have read that he called the cab at 12:14. When is he supposed to have called his girlfriend? I want to know if it is a possible scenario that he finished up his part in a rape, walked out, grabbed his phone from a friend and then made those calls. As to inconclusive DNA results, I just started doing DNA work in my job, the exactly same thing of indentifying what dna material you have (except I am doing it on a truffle). Anyway, there are a million things that can go wrong, particularly in the PCR part of it. Or the sample can be contaminated by any little but of anything that gets in there. Sometimes it just doesn't work out or is not clear, and thus you get inconclusive results. It doesn't mean anything when that happens. It doesn't rule anything out or anything in. If I understand correctly, they are sending it off to get more analysis done. I really hope they get some substanative results, either ruling someone out or ruling someone in. Sadly, it still won't make clear Seligmann's role (ruling him in or out) because if it was supposed to be an oral sex thing I am guessing it is unlikely there would be DNA left behind hours later. Though many if she is saying he was in front of her, maybe the DNA under the fingernails will shed some light on things.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 04:33:12 PM EST
    And yes, Seligmann and McDevitt do look freakishly similar. That reminds of this one time I when I was in high school and I was at a frat party and this creepy frat guy was harassing me. I told my friend about it and tried to point him out to her, and when I turned to survey the crowd, all the frat guys looked so alike to me and were all dressed nearly identically. You know the old line about all [insert minority of choice] looking alike to white people? Well it goes both ways. When I worked in rural NC as a teacher, my students constantly told me I looked like another teacher. We were both tall and thin with long wavy hair and very light skin and neither of us wore make-up. Other than that we looked nothing alike. But my black students frequently said we could have been twins. I think we can all agree that it would be a terrible thing if a rape really did occur but that she misidentified the perp. It would be terrible for the guy who was misidentified and it would be a blow to justice since her credibility would be shot and no one would get convicted of an awful crime (like lots of people are saying if she misidentified Seligmann then Finnerty will not be convicted either).

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 05:29:05 PM EST
    Lora:
    Alcohol clouds judgment and perception. It is not a big stretch to think that the party could have been a tad noisy, covering up noise of a struggle. Hence, a rape involving four people in a closed room, unnoticed by other partygoers is also not a big stretch. There is no reason that other people in the house "must" have noticed anything.
    Are you seriously suggesting that following a disagreement about her performance (or about the payment for it, or whatever, it's not material), the accuser and 3 guys went off into a room together, and everyone else present just got bored and went back to what they were doing as if nothing had happened? If 4 guys at a noisy party go into one room it is quite possible they could be unnoticed. But if one of those 4 people is a female dancer who is a focal point of the party, then I'm sorry, but your reasoning breaks down completely. It is a very big stretch to imagine that they could be unnoticed. Such a stretch that I have to ask if you have you been drinking? If not, what is clouding your judgement and perception?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 06:11:59 PM EST
    I doubt it went unnoticed that people went into a bathroom together. But no one knows for sure what happened in that bathroom except for the people in it. So if your buddy says "nothing happened" you might take his word for it instead of a stripper. And if your buddy says "nothing happened but this is going to look bad for me" you might just try to cover for him. Also, in the stripper's version of the story, only one stripper went into the bathroom. Who knows what was going on with the other stripper? If they were coaxed back in, then something made everyone uncomfortable again, perhaps the other players were busy dealing with the upset second stripper, who according to their story was yelling things at them. That would distract them from whatever was going on with the first stripper.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 06:56:52 PM EST
    J.B. I am not debating any of the points you raise. But your proposed scenarios involve quite different assumptions from the one that Lora was postulating, which involved everyone else at the party simply not noticing what was going on. And even your second suggestion that "the other players were busy dealing with the upset second stripper" does not seem the least bit likely to me. If the first stripper and 3 boys were in the bathroom, then in my opinion any proposed scenario that involves the boys not paying attention to what was going on in that bathroom is not believable. What could possibly have been going on that would be more interesting? It was not New Year's Eve. There was no earthquake. Nobody set a neighbor's house on fire. The police did not arrive at the door. Are you honestly suggesting that everyone present might find an "upset second stripper" more diverting than what might be going on at the same time inside the bathroom? I'm sorry, considering the interests of guys of that age, I have to say that I find your suggestion preposterous. Maybe if the second stripper had actually been stripping you could make the case that they were distracted, but otherwise, your argument is quite unconvincing.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 07:09:26 PM EST
    Are you honestly suggesting that everyone present might find an "upset second stripper" more diverting than what might be going on at the same time inside the bathroom? I'm sorry, considering the interests of guys of that age, I have to say that I find your suggestion preposterous. Maybe if the second stripper had actually been stripping you could make the case that they were distracted, but otherwise, your argument is quite unconvincing.
    Since we want to say that somebody would of known what was going on in that bathroom, then we ultimately have to believe that all 40+ guys know what happened. That to me is where you and others are unconvincing. I truly believe that by now, one guy in that group would have come out and said what he saw. This is a double edged sword here, so if you want to say that the guys knew what was going on, then we would have to also agree that the 2nd stripper should know as well... All of sudden the house is so small when we talk about the players, but it so big when we are talking about the strippers. How is that?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 07:14:39 PM EST
    The defense claims they have "time line photos" from several cameras, so several guys must have been photographing the women and their own passed out buddies. The 12:10 photo "shows a player unconscious on the floor, his shorts pulled down and his underwear wet." Nice. This photo was taken while the defense team claims the women are locked in the bathroom painting their nails. Why aren't there photos of the players outside the bathroom door? They were supposedly shoving money under the door.
    Then both women lock themselves in the bathroom, Ekstrand details. The partygoers get nervous about what the women are up to and start slipping money under the door asking them to leave, says Bill Thomas, a lawyer who represents one of the captains.
    Who wouldn't take a photo of that? There have to be a lot more photos than the ones that have been shown and described. They seized two digital cameras in the first search, maybe Nifong has photos that tell the rest of the story.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by Teresa on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 07:22:29 PM EST
    TalkLeft (or any legal folks) Is it unusual to have DNA test twice in criminal cases?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 08:32:13 PM EST
    Forget the DNA, I want to see the toxicology report. I think that this is what the DA is holding back on. But he needs to prove what was in her system... The defense attorney want to know what was in her blood, and in her urine. Early on, the DA would of told us this by now I would think.... If this is his bombshell, then his case is in big trouble... He has to have a drug that is clearly a date-rape drug, like ryphnol, or GHB. If he has a recreational drug, then it can go either way.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by ding7777 on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 09:05:41 PM EST
    The 12:10 photo "shows a player unconscious on the floor, his shorts pulled down and his underwear wet."
    I'm just wondering how this guy got out of the house by the time the cops arrived at 12:55

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 09:12:23 PM EST
    If Kim's description of the accuser's initial sobriety and rapid decline are accurate, I don't know of any recreational drug that takes you from sober to blotto that quick. Who'd take it? Here's a quote from Kim taken from the Newsweek on the Air radio program:
    It's laughable the facts they've given as true. It's sickening. Sickening. It's almost as sickening as how the fellows conducted themselves that evening.
    I think Kim is going to be a good witness. The accuser is an honor student that is working and raising two kids. She is studying police psychology and wants to go to law school. I think she'll be credible as well. Despite the alleged "She's just a stripper," comment, these aren't a couple of skank 'ho's. What happens if her tox report shows the presence of a date rape drug? Is everyone at the party going to tell their parents they know nothing about how it got into her system? As Freda Black once said during the Michael Peterson trial, "Who's going to believe that?"

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 09:13:47 PM EST
    All the DA needs is one player to say he saw 3 players, and the stripper, go into the bathroom. Just one player. Hell, even the 2nd stripper can't say that. If I were at a party and saw that and a day later she's claiming rape, I'd drop that dime like it was a hot potato. Multiply that by 40 different people. There is no blue wall of silence here. There's just the an extreme lack of evidence/witnesses to an alleged crime... The DA should go back to investigations101. Before indicting someone, bring them in and ask them their where-abouts during the crime. He cast his own judgement early on without investigating the alleged crime to its fullest. He refused to meet with many defense attys to view the pics or discuss possible alibis. What's sad is if a rape did occur then the DA may have let someone get away with a crime due to his incompetence. What's also sad is if there wasn't a rape, then he indicted some innocent people. Hopefully the town won't re-elect this hack. Does anyone know if GBH was found in her system?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 09:17:38 PM EST
    I'm just wondering how this guy got out of the house by the time the cops arrived at 12:55
    Kerry Sutton claims her client Matt Zash spent most of the evening in his room watching TV. I doubt he ran off at 12:54 am. I think the people still in the house when the police showed up just laid low and didn't answer the door.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 09:40:52 PM EST
    Sypderman posted:
    If I were at a party and saw that and a day later she's claiming rape, I'd drop that dime like it was a hot potato. Multiply that by 40 different people. There is no blue wall of silence here. There's just the an extreme lack of evidence/witnesses to an alleged crime...
    How about if you were at the same party and were in a position to say no one ever went into the bathroom with the stripper. Would you drop a dime to report that? The three captains answered when asked - before they had lawyers. They are not talking now and no one else has come forward with that critical information. That's a wall of silence.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by chew2 on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 09:41:17 PM EST
    inmyhumbleopinion, Do you know whether that HS photo of McDevitt is genuine? If genuine, tt would certainly explain, why there might have been a mis-identification of Seligman by the alleged victim, if in fact she is mistaken. If those two are so similar in looks, the DA should have had a live lineup with them speaking out so a voice ID could have also occurred. It's not too late to bring McDevitt in for a lineup.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 09:53:57 PM EST
    It is from this web page. Near the bottom of the page. He would have been in high school when the photo was taken. The Tony McDevitt on the Duke lacrosse team did go to Penn Charter - the name on the jersey the player is wearing in the photo.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 10:27:08 PM EST
    Those pictures are eerily similar. Thanks, IMHO for the link.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:04 PM EST
    It just seems to me that even by appearance 610 Buchanan is just a small house that it is unlikely to put all 41 players plus two dancers in it without anyone noticing a fight and rape in the bathroom. (No one ever wanted to use the bathroom in the whole 30 minutes?) It is also pretty unlikely that no DNA could be found with 4 people having a ferocious struggle in a small bathroom. The accuser not only did not look battered before coming to the house, nor did she look battered to Kim, the first police officer and the Kroeger security guard. Her father said in one interview that when he saw her in the hospital, she looked beaten up. I feel very sad for this woman that she was hurt, supposedly by someone else, and the way to find out who had hurt her is so complicated.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 11:05:17 PM EST
    supamike:
    Since we want to say that somebody would of known what was going on in that bathroom, then we ultimately have to believe that all 40+ guys know what happened. That to me is where you and others are unconvincing. I truly believe that by now, one guy in that group would have come out and said what he saw.
    You misunderstood the argument I was making in my post to JB. Lora had originally posted that activity in the bathroom could have gone unnoticed, which I disputed. So then JB posted that maybe the boys were distracted by the second stripper being upset, and in my post I was disputing that too. I agree with your conclusion that the idea of anything material happening in the bathroom (other than the women locking themselves in there alone) without everyone present knowing about it is not credible.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by january on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 12:04:03 AM EST
    How about if you were at the same party and were in a position to say no one ever went into the bathroom with the stripper. Would you drop a dime to report that? The three captains answered when asked - before they had lawyers. They are not talking now and no one else has come forward with that critical information. That's a wall of silence.
    IMHO, what makes you think anybody would listen if they did come forward to say nobody went into the bathroom with the accuser? Nifong has apparently made it pretty clear he doesn't want to hear anything exculpatory.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 03:16:34 AM EST
    January, you wrote:
    IMHO, what makes you think anybody would listen if they did come forward to say nobody went into the bathroom with the accuser? Nifong has apparently made it pretty clear he doesn't want to hear anything exculpatory.
    Comment: There may come a time when society recognizes anew the necessity of enacting misprision statutes. It would be great to live in a society where such statutes weren't necessary, but cases such as this make it clear that we aren't there yet. David Addison has requested since the beginning that the players come forward. The idea that they aren't accepting evidence that is exculpatory anymore is just one more block in the wall of shill. A lot of people seem to have missed the point of the revolution of 1776. The police and the DA are not our masters. They are our servants. If this dancer has filed a false report a complaint should be filed against her, and an investigation will follow. If you must bring a lawyer, out of some fear that the police have something against you, do. For the most part a video camera should suffice. Present your case openly and honestly and don't fail to include all pertinent details. And keep a record. The police can't guarantee a conviction, but there's a good chance you can be made whole by the end of the process. If you do hire an attorney, the most important thing to remember is that the attorney is your employee. They can't tell you what to do, and they their concern is not what is right or wrong. That is your concern alone.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 05:28:13 AM EST
    mmyy posted:
    (No one ever wanted to use the bathroom in the whole 30 minutes?)
    Haven't you heard? Some of these "boys" have been cited for public urination. The lad in one of the photos apparently didn't even bother to go outside. mmyy posted:
    The accuser not only did not look battered before coming to the house, nor did she look battered to Kim, the first police officer and the Kroeger security guard. Her father said in one interview that when he saw her in the hospital, she looked beaten up. I feel very sad for this woman that she was hurt, supposedly by someone else, and the way to find out who had hurt her is so complicated.
    The defense team is claiming she was bruised and cut when she got there:
    "The photographs show the accuser has bruises and cuts on her arms, legs and feet," Cheshire said. "These are visible at the very start of the dance."
    When the security guard and the first officer on the scene made their assessment the accuser was in the car. The accuser's father went to the hospital and waited there for over an hour, but he did not see her until the next day. If she was injured after the party, it would have to have been between the women drving off at 12:53 and showing up at Krogerss at 1:22 or when the police officer picked her up at 1:30 and brought her first to the drunk tank, then the hospital at 2:31 am. I'm sure there are photos taken at the hospital. They may show facial swelling and bruising that are not visible in the defense photos. If the doctor did try to put the accuser's leg back into its socket, that too should be in the hospital report. Rumors are that the report notes vaginal tearing and strangulation marks.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 05:50:54 AM EST
    january posted:
    IMHO, what makes you think anybody would listen if they did come forward to say nobody went into the bathroom with the accuser?
    The fact that he has already taken statements from the three captains and was prepared to take the statements of the rest of the team. Nifong didn't cancel the meeting - the players' attorneys did. january posted:
    Nifong has apparently made it pretty clear he doesn't want to hear anything exculpatory.
    The defense attorneys have been withholding evidence from the investigators, while trotting out select "exculpatory photos" to reporters. I think what Nifong has made clear is he not going to be part of their dog and pony show. Round two: Nifong.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 06:22:29 AM EST
    Also an interesting note about Finnerty's prior arrest for assault -- he was neither charged nor convicted of any crime:
    Finnerty agreed to perform community service to avoid being formally charged.
    That could change. He has a court date tomorrow in DC.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 07:40:39 AM EST
    How long does it take for bruising to appear? The facial and other body bruises could be explained by the fall down the back stairs, but can a forensic specialist give a time frame in which the bruising caused by sex/rape could have occured? The fact that she had broken nails and injuries when she arrived certainly suggests that she was somewhere else earlier. It's strange that someone would be so concerned about her nails that she would paint them before leaving a house (as evidenced by the wet nail polish on the railing) in which she alleges she was raped, but showed up to a paid gig with them unkempt. It could mean she had been rushed to get to the house. If she was at another engagement earlier, and was drinking, quickly knocking back a glass and a half of a mixed drink upon arrival at the house (per Kim) could have put her over the edge in a cumulative effect that only appeared to be sudden impairment, especially if she's petite as her cousin says. Is the DA obligated to investigate where she was earlier or does he just rely on her story if it sounds plausible?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by azbballfan on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 08:15:53 AM EST
    Those who are calling for charges to be dropped based solely upon evidence and timelines established by the defense team are wrong. We don't have access to enough of the prosecutions evidence to poke holes in inconsistencies. Before we do, let's get ourselves ready to see a lot of inconsistencies in the evidence. In a good case, there will be. In this case, the timelines will be "established" by a lot of inconsistent reporting of times. Cell phone records and police records will be accurate. ATM receipts will be accurate. Pictures and reported times from people won't be as accurate. The posts on blogs indicate that a lot of people have already come to their own verdict. Many who hope and pray the boys are innocent present the evidence of the defense team. The only evidence we have from the prosecution are incomplete leaks of her testimony and a lack of DNA evidence in preliminary tests. The lack of DNA evidence is strange and the prosecution will need to provide an explanation. This in of itself does not exonerate any alleged suspects. Those who criticise Nifong for initially going to the press should be reminded that on March 28th, he was calling for the players to cooperate. Those who point to the three players who approached Nifong and offered to take lie detector tests: They were the residents in the house who knew they were the only players the university knew for sure were involved. They come forward to clear their name and gave lists of players at the party. They offer to take a lie detector test and the DA choses in good faith to take them at their word at the time. By the way - please note that the list of players at the party submitted to the DA did not include Seligmann. After this, the team clams up. Those who point to the timeline of events indicated by the taxi driver: His time stamped records indicate he later picked up players in front of the house at 1:06 and tells of a small crowd of boys in front of the house. Police records show they were at the house knocking on the door at 1:05 only to have no one answer. This indicates that the taxi driver's timelines are erroneously pushed up. It's more likely that the taxi driver picked up boys from the house after they felt comfortable the police weren't coming back - say 10-20 minutes or so.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by Lora on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 08:48:09 AM EST
    Have you ever been to a college party? Do you know how noisy and rowdy and chaotic they can be? Especially when you have over 40 people partying in one little house? The show was over, as far as the strippers and the partyers were concerned. How many knew that anyone was trying to get them back inside? Chances are it didn't take very long for many of them, the ones not actively involved with trying to coax the dancers back, to simply continue partying in a noisy chaotic manner. So frankly I don't think my scenario is that out of line. Besides if any had decided to try to have sex with the stripper, they wouldn't necessarily advertise that fact. By the way, a photo cannot show unconsciousness or impairment. That is the interpretation of what the photo shows. OK, you want an unlikely scenario, here's one: A young woman decides ahead of time to not dance for a party she's hired for, but take their money and cry rape. She decides this having never even met the woman she's supposed to dance with. Somehow, she gets herself deliberately injured, enough to fool hospital personnel into thinking her injuries could likely be a result of forcible rape and assault, goes to a party, drinks something she thinks might knock her out, somehow breaks off her fingernails in the bathroom to leave fake evidence, forgets a shoe, doesn't even mention the rape until she's been brought to the substance abuse center, etc etc etc....I'm really buying it, are you? Or, she arrives having been already badly hurt, and takes something to knock herself out. Somehow she can dance just fine at first, despite her severe and extensive injuries. She decides not to blame it on whoever hurt her, but on the boys at this party. Again, she doesn't tell her fellow dancer, or even mention that she was raped until the police officer thought she might have been drunk. Well this one is marginally more believable, I guess, but frankly they both have at least as many holes in them as the scenario I proposed.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 08:54:19 AM EST
    Nice post, azbballfan. This last part:
    Those who point to the timeline of events indicated by the taxi driver: His time stamped records indicate he later picked up players in front of the house at 1:06 and tells of a small crowd of boys in front of the house. Police records show they were at the house knocking on the door at 1:05 only to have no one answer. This indicates that the taxi driver's timelines are erroneously pushed up. It's more likely that the taxi driver picked up boys from the house after they felt comfortable the police weren't coming back - say 10-20 minutes or so.
    That could have happened, but Kim would have to have had to come back after the police left at 1:06 a.m. The taxi driver saw her get into her car. He also heard his passengers say "She's going to call the police." I think it is more likely the taxi got there to pick up the four passengers just before Bissey saw the Kim's car drive off - a few minutes before the police arrived on the scene at 12:55. The cab driver got the call to return to the party house at 12:29. He still had Seligmann in the car, probably on the way to the Cook Out restaurant. Seligmann swiped his card to enter the dorm at 12:46. The dorm is 1.9 miles from 610 N Buchanan. Assuming Seligmann went right inside his dorm after exiting the cab, and the cab driver drove directly from the Edens 2 dorm to the party house, the timing works out pretty well.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by azbballfan on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 09:02:13 AM EST
    imho - The cab driver picked up two people when he picked up Seligmann. Taxi driver reports he returned to house AFTER dropping off Seligmann. We haven't established that the black woman in jeans and a sweater was second dancer. She was at the grocery store around that time - If you beleive all the time reports established by the taxi driver and the 911 calls. Throw out the time stamped pics. Defense hasn't surrendered the evidence to police and hired their own "forensics" experts to work on them.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#56)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 09:42:37 AM EST
    The cab driver picked up two people when he picked up Seligmann. Taxi driver reports he returned to house AFTER dropping off Seligmann.
    Yes, I know. He dropped Seligmann off about 12:46 at Edens2. It is 1.9 miles from the party house. The driver then headed back to 610 N Buchanan to pick up the fare that called him at 12:29 - when he was still in the middle of the Seligmann fare. That would get him to the party house just about the time Kim was leaving and about to call the cops(first 911 call 12:53). The scene the cab driver described sounds like the police hadn't been there yet and the woman was about to leave. The four guys he picked up said "she is going to call the police." He did describe the car as white. Kim described her car as "dark blue, but it looks black at night." Kim would have to have come back after 1:06 am or some other "light-skinned black woman" was yelling at the players and threatening to call the police after the police left at 1:06. The Krogers is only a few minutes from the party house. Kim could have been at the party after 1:06 and still gotten to Krogers by 1:22, but I don't think it happened that way. It is possible, but the cab driver says he went from Edens2 to the party. It couldn't have taken him 20 minutes to drive 1.9 miles. I think the scene he witnessed took place sometime between 12:49 and 12:55

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#57)
    by Teresa on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 09:53:08 AM EST
    It is possible, but the cab driver says he went from Edens2 to the party. It couldn't have taken him 20 minutes to drive 1.9 miles. I think the scene he witnessed took place sometime between 12:49 and 12:55
    I do too imho, but I can't understand the white car. Kim's car IS dark. You can see it in the pictures. I have read that there are two more "lacrosse" houses nearby. One is just around the corner and one a block away. Maybe when the players scattered they went to one of these houses to meet the taxi. That doesn't explain the white car and light skinned dark woman though. The cabbie must be mistaken on his time because I can't figure his incentive to lie.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 10:01:42 AM EST
    Six Duke lax players seek spots at JHU
    Sophomore Brendan O'Connor disagreed, saying that the players should not receive special treatment. "It's inappropriate that they are not going through the normal admissions process because you usually need a very compelling reason to be admitted outside of University guidelines -- not just making poor choices about with whom you associate yourself," he said.
    Smart young man. That should not apply to the players who were not at the party and are willing to cooperate with the investigation or even the players that were there and are willing to cooperate and continue to be cooperative.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#59)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 10:08:25 AM EST
    The cabbie must be mistaken on his time because I can't figure his incentive to lie.
    Yes, I agree he is mistaken about the time and the color of the car. It makes you wonder if he is mistaken about what time he picked up Seligmann and the other guy. He says 12:19 but the ATM at 9th and Main is less than 2 minutes away. The ATM swipe is supposedly 12:24. There's a couple more minutes there that Seligman could be at the party house.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#60)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 10:17:57 AM EST
    Maybe he swiped at 12:24 because someone was in line before him or already at the machine -- lots of possibilities.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#61)
    by january on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 10:55:28 AM EST
    If you do hire an attorney, the most important thing to remember is that the attorney is your employee. They can't tell you what to do, and they their concern is not what is right or wrong. That is your concern alone. Sorry, PB - If you hire an attorney, you're hiring somebody who may be presumed to know better than you do how our justice system works. Why would you do that and not take his/her advice? One of the things that annoys me most about the comments in this case is how the lacrosse players are being thought less of because a) they hired attorneys and b) they followed their advice. Tell me each and every one of you, when faced with charges of a serious crime, wouldn't do the same thing. And one more question for you, PB. You're awfully concerned about "society's" right to a fair trial. Are you including the Duke lacross players in "society?" Sometimes I wonder.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#62)
    by Lora on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 11:50:17 AM EST
    Well it appears that there were at least two people who might not have been paying attention to who was or wasn't in the bathroom: the fellow who was apparently passed out with his pants down, and the person who took his picture. That apparently was more interesting that whatever was going on with either of the strippers at that time.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 12:07:47 PM EST
    Hi January, You wrote:
    And one more question for you, PB. You're awfully concerned about "society's" right to a fair trial. Are you including the Duke lacross players in "society?" Sometimes I wonder.
    I can't think of a single "right" of the Duke lacrosse players that I would not rigorously defend. But I don't confuse the exercising of one's rights with doing what's right. And I fervently recommend the latter. Our right to free speech allows us to say such things as "Thank your grandfather for the cotton shirt," for example. I hold the view that the person who said that had a right to say it and was wrong to do so. You wrote:
    One of the things that annoys me most about the comments in this case is how the lacrosse players are being thought less of because a) they hired attorneys and b) they followed their advice. Tell me each and every one of you, when faced with charges of a serious crime, wouldn't do the same thing.
    I feel that they were right to hire the attorneys and wrong to follow their advise. I hired an attorney once, but would not do it again, except maybe to ask for pointers. Are there many cases in American History where over 40 material witnesses refused to cooperate with the investigation? I know in the Skakel case quite a number of people hid behind their lawyer's, but not 40. Can anyone think of a criminal case more numerically notorious than this one? Surely this can't be a record, can it?

    Lora, I think I'm with you on this point. I think it's highly plausible that not everybody at the party would be equally aware of every event that transpired. By the same token I think it's entirely implausible that if the girl was raped, sodomized and beaten in a bathroom, nobody at the party, besides her attackers, would be aware of it. I'm not as supportive of another point you made, though. I think that late-teens/early-20's guys would probably not try to hide an attempt to have sex with a stripper - however a plan to rape a stripper would likely be secretive. However, I'm not sure any of this is relevant - aren't we working with the claim that no sex occured? ie, that there was neither consentual nor non-consentual sex?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#65)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 12:19:57 PM EST
    Some attorneys will tell you, at times, their ethical duties dictate they advise a course of action that is morally repugnant. This could take the form of unfairly trashing a rape victim, not coming forward if you saw your teammates drag a woman, who later claims she was raped, into the bathroom, not volunteering you saw your teammate spike someone's drink... You are paying an attorney for advice on how the justice system works. If your only concern is how best to navigate the system and come out unscathed then go ahead and do what they tell you to do. Some people's concerns go beyond doing what is solely in their own best interests. Some people believe in actual justice.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 12:22:49 PM EST
    Doesn't this strike anyone else as strange? You have a wild party with over 40 guys guzzling away on beer for at least an hour before the strippers get there and start their routine. Three minutes into the routine the strippers stop. Shortly after that the bathroom is mysteriously "occupied" for 30 minutes, and nobody at the party seems to notice anything? Unless all but 3 of those 40 guys are going outside pretty frequently for some "public urination," then somebody has got to be asking, "Who's hogging the bathroom?" (A loud knock on the door confirms it's busy.) "I think it's Larry, Joe and Moe." "What are they doing in there TOGETHER?" "I think they're banging one of the strippers." "No kidding?!" Sex! The next sequence of photos would show a large crowd gathered outside the bathroom door eager to find out more of the details. I mean REALLY ... Neither one of those two women just "disappeared" inside the bathroom with three guys for 30 minutes, and NOBODY else at the party noticed anything unusual. Word would have traveled to everyone in the entire house within minutes - including the second stripper - as the backyard began to saturate with urine.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#67)
    by Teresa on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 12:44:29 PM EST
    SLO, IF this 3-way rape happened it probably took only a few minutes. She would be mistaken. It may have felt like 30 minutes but it wouldn't be. I don't think there was much seducing and foreplay involved. I'm not saying I believe this happened just that the time involved would just be a few minutes.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#69)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 12:47:02 PM EST
    PB I was in a legal position similar to the Lacrosse players once - a DA was considering "charging" any number of a group of disparate people for white-collar crime I knew I had not committed (not anything remotely like rape). The legal advice I got was to say nothing. Don't answer a subpoena (take the 5th). I consider myself an honest guy and it was extremely difficult to follow this advice - I wanted desperately to explain my situation to the DA. I knew I was right and I wanted to clear up any misunderstanding. I followed my lawyer's advice. Others involved, who I did not know, talked with the DA. Several ending up getting charged with trumped up one-sided charges and some even went to trial, partially based upon a twisted interpretation of what they told the DA. In the end they won - at considerable expense and years out of their lives. Some of these were people who thought they were just talking as potential witnesses and were trying to "explain" what happened. Having outstanding charges just drains you, especially if you are innocent. Those of us who said nothing - nothing happened- it just went away. My experience was a personal eye-opener. As one who had never tangled with our justice system I was stunned at the close-mindedness and inertia that exists once the authorities think you might be guilty. Life is not a TV show where the DA is always a good guy searching for justice. We have an adversarial system - if the DA wants to press charges, even if they are weak, he can. Though there is the presumption of innocence, it's up to the accused to present a defense. In this case, if nothing happened, assume some, if not all of the lacrosse players know that. They'd be nuts to talk with this DA, given his actions and statements so far. If nothing happened, he has already indicted two innocent people and says he's not done. He simply doesn't believe the lax players and doesn't want to hear what they say or know, unless it helps his case. It's easy for us to say what the players should do, but the penalties for rape are enormous. Innocent people do get convicted. False eyewitness testimony is a leading cause of that. Sometimes you have to look out for yourself, like it or not. This is one of those times.

    ...and, ultimately, all the players will be deposed and if they have pertinent info they will be called to the witness stand by either the prosecution or the defense. Right?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#71)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 01:16:00 PM EST
    SomewhatChunky, We don't know what conclusions can be drawn from your experience. We don't know enough about the others involved. We don't know if their lack of culpability was identical to yours. We don't know what would have happened had they not cooperated with the investigation. They may still have stood trial. The jury may have taken the fact that they did cooperate as a sign of their credibilty and lack of conciousness of guilt. It may be creditied with their not guilty verdict. We just don't know enough for this to be a helpful model.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#72)
    by chew2 on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 01:19:40 PM EST
    and, ultimately, all the players will be deposed and if they have pertinent info they will be called to the witness stand by either the prosecution or the defense. Right?
    Depositions are available in civil cases. I don't know what the procedure is in criminal cases. I asked this question in a previous thread but TL didn't answer. The team members may refuse to cooperate with the DA raising a 5th Amendment privilege against self incrimination because of the underage drinking, assault and other possible charges (spiking her drink) that could be brought against them, not necessarily rape. The DA could grant immunity from prosecution for these charges if he though it was worth it. I asked whether the DA could have subpoenaed the camera and photos to perform his own examination. The fact that he hasn't done so, or subpoenaed the team members, suggests that he may not have the power to compel testimony. I have heard of compelling testimony before a grand jury (ala Barry Bonds) but that wasn't done in this case. These were questions I posed to TL.

    I don't know either, Squeaky. Although, to me, this is all boiling down to a "our system of justice is not always just" argument, which I won't dispute, in contrast with "these boys are "bad" because they act within our system of justice" argument, which I can't support.

    ..sorry, chew2, I was responding to you, not Squeaky...

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#75)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 01:27:40 PM EST
    Teresa, If you saw the Abrams Report, and I know you have...lol...you can pretty much say that this case is over. *smile* The 2nd dancer was in that bathroom, she basicly said it, on the stand....lol

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#76)
    by Teresa on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 01:50:15 PM EST
    If you saw the Abrams Report, and I know you have...lol...you can pretty much say that this case is over. *smile* The 2nd dancer was in that bathroom, she basicly said it, on the stand....lol
    Yep, I saw it. I don't think this case is going anywhere anyway but I took her answer a little differently. She said it is a lie that they were putting money under the door while they were in the bathroom. I took it that it was a lie because they WERE NOT in the bathroom together. What do you think about the mental health and drug records request from high school (the actual motion says college and high school)? Why is the defense going this far when they have what appears to be a slam dunk?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#77)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 02:03:42 PM EST
    Hi SomewhatChunky, You wrote:
    Life is not a TV show where the DA is always a good guy searching for justice.
    Kerry Sutton, a defense attorney for one of the players, has a Nifong campaign sign in her yard. Why? She knows him. You've simply fallen for the shill. You wrote:
    My experience was a personal eye-opener. As one who had never tangled with our justice system I was stunned at the close-mindedness and inertia that exists once the authorities think you might be guilty.
    My one experience was when a recalcitrant judge refused to furnish me with a transcript of a hearing . I filed a motion and he denied it. So I hired a lawyer. The lawyer wrote a motion quite a bit worse than the one I had written, which was also, of course, denied, and charged me $1000 for it. In the meantime, I called the administrative overseer of the judge, who forced the judge to get me the transcript I had sought. I recognize that I'm ideosyncratic, but I actually prefer having a fool for a client to having a fool for a lawyer.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#78)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 02:03:52 PM EST
    Yep, I saw it. I don't think this case is going anywhere anyway but I took her answer a little differently. She said it is a lie that they were putting money under the door while they were in the bathroom. I took it that it was a lie because they WERE NOT in the bathroom together.
    I didnt actually take it that way, because she was straight out asked i she was in the bathroom, and she refused to answer. And the way she looked away, proved to me that she was lying...but okay, I accept that others may see it differently. My point is that if she was not in the bathroom, why would she not outwardly just come out and say NO!!! I was not in that bathroom with her. Also the painting of the fingrnails, she said she did not see that, that to me is saying that she was in the bathroom, but did not see the accuser do that. Why would she refuse to not answer the question about whether she was in that bathroom or not?
    What do you think about the mental health and drug records request from high school (the actual motion says college and high school)? Why is the defense going this far when they have what appears to be a slam dunk?
    I think we are going to find out, that the accuser has a mental history, which explains the whole thing that happened at the strip club in 2002. Can you say BIPOLAR? lol Anyway going back all the way to high school goes to her credibility, because she may be known to do things like this. Also that report, shows what evidence the defense has...If they got evidence of drug abuse, alcoholism, and dishonesty, then you are right, that would be a game winning shot. I think right now, she and the DA are looking for exits...You think?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#79)
    by Teresa on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 02:19:35 PM EST
    I think we are going to find out, that the accuser has a mental history, which explains the whole thing that happened at the strip club in 2002. Can you say BIPOLAR? lol
    I would believe the bipolar part. I have a 22 year old niece that is bi-polar and some of the things that she has done in the past shows me how seriously this illness can mess you up if you aren't on medication or if your medication is wrong for you. I think Kim has been told not to discuss the bathroom at all and she realized she messed up. I loved the analogy by the former DA; if you cast a play in hell you won't have angels for characters. Very fitting here don't you think?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#80)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 02:21:38 PM EST
    My point is that if she was not in the bathroom, why would she not outwardly just come out and say NO!!! I was not in that bathroom with her.
    Why haven't the 47 lacrosse players said the same thing?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#81)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 02:24:45 PM EST
    I think Kim has been told not to discuss the bathroom at all and she realized she messed up. I loved the analogy by the former DA; if you cast a play in hell you won't have angels for characters. Very fitting here don't you think?
    Yes I thought that hit the nail on the head with this case completely. Why would her lawyer not allow her to speak on the bathroom issue? Its an easy question. I mean was she in the bathroom during those minutes that you and I posted on earlier? from that 12:05 to 12:20 time period, this is crucial...why would you think she cant speak on that? I mean if she wasnt, she wasnt...if she was, then she was...its not a complex question...

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#82)
    by Teresa on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 02:33:31 PM EST
    Supa, I can't possibly answer you any better than imho did above. :)

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#83)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 03:15:30 PM EST
    Teresa, The bipolar issue, is definitely and exit for this accuser, and I anot saying she is bipolar, or she isnt. I am simply saying that she can find her exit door, by claiming she is bipolar. But I still dont see the exit door for the DA, who may of rushed to judgement on this case. Lastly where is our 3rd assailant? Why is the DNA taking so long, and now seems to be coming back after the election? I am not asking you these things, I am simply saying that if he had a strong hand, and was sure a rape occured, he would be putting guys behind bars.

    Nifong also said that he doesn't plan to seek any more indictments in the case on May 1, when the grand jury meets again.
    My bet is that he is saying he probably won't be seeking any more indictments - neither on May 1, nor any other day...

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#85)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 03:53:56 PM EST
    Why haven't the 47 lacrosse players said the same thing?
    The players hav all said that both of the women were in the bathroom together, they hav enot held back on that at all.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#86)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 03:58:17 PM EST
    My bet is that he is saying he probably won't be seeking any more indictments - neither on May 1, nor any other day...
    Right now my bet is that he is looking for an exit door. But he is not gonna make a move until after the election. Right now he should be bringing forward his 3rd assailant. Where is this guy? Why so long on the DNA? Why hasnt he made available to the defense the toxicology report? Is he investigating that DNA under her fingernails for someone other than the players? Now it seems the security guard at the Kroger is playing the race card, on this thing. She has now flipped to stick with the "black side"...this case is not about race, but some would try to inject it, in any chance they get... That to me is wrong.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#87)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 04:11:00 PM EST
    The players hav all said that both of the women were in the bathroom together, they hav enot held back on that at all.
    Only three players have spoken to the investigators. The other 44 players have not said anything to the investigators. Both of the women being together in the bathroom at some point does not preclude the fact that the accuser could have been in the bathroom without Kim at another point. If Kim wasn't in the bathroom when the players were shoving the money under the door, who were the players shoving the money to?

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#88)
    by Teresa on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 04:23:38 PM EST
    I know nothing about DNA but I've read that certain tests take a long time and may even involve some kind of cloning or growing of the sample. I am way over my head here so I don't know. I hope the DA has more evidence than her word and the DNA. If that's all he has then he is not worthy of being a DA. In that case I think the young men should be able to have some kind of recourse. I would hope a public official wouldn't do something like this for political purposes, but then look at our political leaders today. I hope that TL will put up a post about the motion filed today regarding the high school and Children's Services records (if any) and how it is pertinent. If their alibi's are so ironclad why do they need these records? Too bad the accuser has to rely on the state and not 50 highly paid lawyers. I'd disappear permanently if I were her.

    Re: Newsweek on Duke Rape Case: Open Thread (none / 0) (#89)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 24, 2006 at 05:32:11 PM EST
    Comments are closing, a new thread is here.