Duke lacrosse team rape accusations
 

I'm not sure this thread belongs in Tilted Sports, but let's start it here.

This thing is a mess... and it is interesting on many fronts. Here's what i'd like to start with.

Obviously, this is good example of why its not a great idea to 1) hire strippers for a party and/or 2) be a stripper for hire to private parties. Crazy things can, and do, happen.

Anyway, DNA evidence is a pretty new thing. Yesterday, when i heard that all the kids tested negative, i thought OK, good. Everybody' cleared. Today, i heard that the DA said, no... the DNA was not definitive and the case was going to continue.

So, help me, I'm confused. If you have to be guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt (think OJ), isn't a negative DNA test automatically, by definition, a significant doubt?

Thanks for listening.

A test that comes up blank doesn't prove a particular person innocent.

A test that comes up with a real match to an unknown DNA profile may exonerate a suspect, but if there's multiple rapes involved (i.e. a woman says she was screwed by two guys) then all DNA testing can do is count people IN.

Think of it like fingerprints - find a print and you know that the owner of the print was certainly there. Find nothing and you know nothing.

according to any article about the Duke case today. I'm not sure what that means, especially out of context. I would assume that there was semen collected from the medical exam of the rape victim, otherwise they wouldn't have done the DNA test.

I think the dna tests came from pubic hairs or other areas. I think now that DNA is so widely used that in almost every rape case some sort of DNA testing will be done. I'm not really sure how to feel about this whole issue. I hate how the media is claiming some big race war that is going to happen. I don't think that's an issue at all. With the lack of charges and arrests I think the DA's office is scrambling to really find something. If the kids are guilty I hate it for the university considering their reputation and for the girl. If they are innocent, I hate it for the university's reputation alone.

I was pretty surprised at how quickly the defense came out saying that the DNA and pictures showed the kids were innocent. Supposedly, this would have stayed behind closed doors if they defense didn't go public. :shrug:

The lack of DNA evidence doesn't exonerate them, but it does make it much tougher for the police and DA to figure out which 3 of them were actually involved in the crime. He says they have good evidence that the crime occurred. It's just a matter of figuring out who did and that's usually the hard part.

I always get a little crosseyed trying to decipher the true meaning of the term sexual assult.

Can't we say definitively, if a rapist had vaginal intercouse with their victim, regardless of whether they ejaculate, it leaves DNA evidence?

Thanks for listening.

I think that it depends on what evidence they (CSI) manage to collect, i.e. if they can find actual semen or body hairs not belonging to the victim. Also, a DNA test is not a test for latex or lubricants, which I'm sure would be done too to see if there was a condom present.

This all is getting stranger and stranger.

Despite my visceral hatred of Duke University athletics, I don't wish this on anybody, even their men's basketball team.

I hope that this ends with someone prosecuted, whether it is someone who actually performed the rape, or the "victim" who made a false accusation.

This is just a complete shame.

It is <i>very</i> strange. Something just doesn't add up to me. I'm starting to think that maybe the girl made a bad call then called rape after the fact. (I surely hope no rape happend) If she was raped... then the little rich kids may get a taste of their own medicine.

It's hard to take sides on this one, isn't it?

It really is. I love Duke University, but there's no way that will affect my disdain for the kids if they did rape her.

It wasn't hard for me. The minute I heard that the entire team (except for the black guy, since the accusation said the assailants were white) immediately submitted their DNA, I knew no team members had raped the alleged victim.

I was subsequently unsurprised in the least that the DNA tests came back negative.

Then I heard the other stripper couldn't/wouldn't corroborate the story.

Then there's this:

Link

I'm not having any difficulty forming an opinion.

As an added bonus, when I see activists demanding that the DA make arrests, I have to wonder whom they want to see arrested. The entire team? Just the people she identifies, when there is NO supporting evidence?

This smells, all right.

You make it sound like they cooperated with police and voluntarily submitted their DNA. They didn't. They weren't cooperating, which is why the police was forced to issue a non-testimonial order. Also, keep in mind that all the information coming out in recent days is coming directly from the defense attorneys, so you have to take it with a grain of salt. We don't know what evidence the DA has, but he clearly has something. It is impossible to honestly make a judgement one way or another on this.

I haven't had a chance to hear or read the full story yet, but on this mornings news, I saw that two kids turned themselves in about 4:55 am this morning. I also missed an interview with the second stripper. I think it may come down to her testimony if anything. Of course with kids turning themselves in.. who knows what happend. I just know that I'm dissapointed in this whole thing. When you hear something like this, you expect it to be the University of Colorado, not Duke.

I just hope the right stories come out and justice comes swiftly for whatever happend.

They may have turned themselves in, but it was based on an indictment, and they say that they are innocent.

2 Duke lacrosse players arrested - Duke lacrosse rape scandal - MSNBC.com

The one thing I hope doesn't happen is that this DA just goes ahead gung ho knowing that there is a pending election. Don't get me wrong, if the kids did it, then put them where they belong, if they didn't then drop the case and let them move on.

If it was just a picture identification, then that's really not much to go on. DNA has been issued and nothing was there, I want to see the pictures and if the girl was really intoxicated when she arrived. I guess it's all up to Motion of Discovery now.

Did i hear correctly this morning that she now says she was raped with a broomstick. i dont know if that was the only object allegedly inserted into her.

but no matter what happens right now, i pray that this doesnt turn into another Tawana Brawley case

I haven't heard the broomstick story.

This case gets uglier and uglier by the day. We have defense attorneys really swinging for the knockout. They say they have pictures, and no dna. Now they claim that they have concrete evidence that the two charged weren't even at the house when the rape supposedly took place. They are also starting to question the "victims" (only in quotes because we don't know if she was raped or not yet) credibility. The "victim" has several felonies including a stolen car, felony assault on a government official and felony eluding arrest.

Something else that I want to note, is the even if the medical report states that she has injuries consistent with sexual assault, that does not mean it happend at that house. According to one report, she did leave the house and came back later. Something just doesn't add up in this case, (of course I don't know all the details) I guess we'll have to wait and see what the more detailed DNA tests say when they come back today.


As for now, I'm trying to hold a non-partisan stance, but it seems I'm leaning towards the kids defense.

Its only a matter of time before the boys are cleared.

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?se...cal&id=4091290

Stevo,

I don't know if this timeline especially exonorates anyone in and of itself. There's a 20 minute gap (12:10 to 12:30) that give more than ample time for a rape to occur. There's an accomanying timeline for one of the accused that has him at a bank at 12:24 and a cabbie that picked him up roughly 5 minutes before. That gives the guy basically 10 minutes, which I suppose is also ample time, although it doesn't make sense to call a cab, wait, rape the woman, then catch the cab.

The whole thing still stinks to high heavens on both sides.

Full disclosure time - a good friend's brother and friend were murdered in Raleigh about 2 years ago. This prosecutor (actually a deputy) successfully got put away one perpetrator for life and the other for 14+ years. Everything that I heard from my friend was only high praise for everyone in the office, including the boss. The guy apparently lives for putting bad guys away, and my friend finds it difficult to believe that he (the prosecutor) would grandstand for political gain.

The defense counsel for one of the murderers is highly involved in this case as well. I believe that the term that my friend used (and was later repeated by his father) is "absolute motherfucker". There were obviously some emotional scars here since son/brother/victim was only 22 and really did nothing wrong, but at one point my friend was talking about sueing the defense counsel because he was so angry. That's not going to happen, but my point is that some of the lawyers involved are both very good and very slick. In my friend's case, there was never really any doubt as guilt or not since there were dozens of witnesses and phone tap confessions, but there seems to be a crack of daylight in the rape case.

I'm going to repeat my thoughts from Post #10 - it's hard to take sides on this one.

The timeline doesn't clear anyone, but if bruises and such were on the girl before the alleged rape, that will damage the prosecution's argument considerably. Something else you may want to consider is that if the DA really had some weight to throw in this case, he wouldn't have gone to a closed grand jury. There would have been a preliminary hearing. I don't think I've ever seen a defense team come out swinging like this. To me that seems like they honestly know they have the knockout punch. Most defense lawyers would want this type of case to stay behind closed doors.. granted it could be a slick move on their part, but highly doubtful.

The_Jazz, of course your friend has high praise for the DA office. If my brother was killed and the DA got the perps sentenced to that kind of time, I'd praise him too. I still believe he's pulling some sort of political gain out of his ass with this one.

There are just way too many holes (at this point) for me to say the kids are guilty. I believe in Innocent until Proven Guilty, but alot of times you know when someone did something like this. The more I read, the more I hear, the more I believe the kids are innocent. I just hope I'm right.

Like i said, this is a mess. It's complicated, somewhat emotionally unsettling and difficult to look away from (like a car accident).

Two general "stripper" questions. 1st, i don't have a lot of lifetime stripper hiring experience, but i've never seen a situation where the girls showed up without a body guard. Is this normal? 2nd, there seems to be evidence from several sources that the girl was loaded. Again, my experience is that the strippers always seemed under control, naked, but in control of themselves and the situation. Can we share some stripper experiences here?

Thanks for listening.

Stripper experiences: I've seen them come with and without body guards. More often than not they come with body guards.

The other stripper said that when they got there the girl seemed in control, but when they left she couldn't speak well or walk well. That could mean she got drunk there or something really did happen.

According to pictures, the stripper is seen with bruises and scrapes on her body on arrival. I think that is a huge key in this whole thing. If she showed up with injuries it could be that something happend before. Maybe not rape, but there has to be an explanation for the bruises.

If I were the defense.. I'd ask for a speedy trial as soon as the next round of DNA tests come back. If they get a speedy trial and the DA really doesn't have much, then the kids would be found not guilty or the case would be thrown out relativly fast.

The DA is up for re-election.

The thought is the charges will be dropped shortly after.

I'm having trouble seeing why the DA would bring these charges on a weak case with an election looming. With all the holes that the defense is poking in the assumed facts, I've got to believe that either the DA knows something that hasn't been made public yet or that he's been lied to. This is too high profile of a case for the DA to indict on a whim, and if it blows up, people are going to remember it.

Let's also pause a second to remember that one of the defendants threated to rape both of the strippers with a broomstick and made racial threats. At least one of them is an asshole with some issues, although that's certainly not illegal.

I haven't heard that a defendant in question threatend to rape both of them with a broomstick. I have heard that one of the kids present suggested they use the broom as a sex toy. There is an issue there. Was it light hearted joking while a kid was drunk? Was it an actual threat? Who knows.

I think the DA had to do something. People took this allegation to the extreme around Durham. (I'm not far from Durham, so this is all I hear about all day) The public outrage (for no real reason) prompted the DA to make some sort of move. He may have felt that he was better off at least trying something than doing nothing especially right before election.

Remember, the DA was gungho about the DNA results because he "knew it would be bulletproof". When that didn't happen, what is he supposed to do? Well like any gungho over-anxious DA, you go to a closed Grand Jury session and get an indictment. Had the DA really had anything to get a firm conviction in this case, there would have been a preliminary hearing (can't remember the exact name of the hearing).

Now, like I said I am leaning towards the Boys in this case, but if something comes out to prove otherwise I will happily retract and support whatever sentence they receive.

I still don't have enough information to take a side, but
made me think "date rape drugs".

Also, were there no other men aside from the team members at this party? If there were a rape, could it have been somebody else in the house?

From all the information I've heard there were no other men in the house. She did show up with bruises though and she did leave and come back.. so there's some holes there. Another thing I remember just now is that there is a cab driver statement saying he heard the girls say they were calling the cops. This poses a little bump for the defense but more than likely they will claim it was over something petty. Keep in mind she left her purse inside and had to go back in and get it. There are alot of holes in this case.. and it's getting nasty. As far as the date rape drugs go, I would think that some sort of test has already been done to find out what the girl had in her system. I think that's part of the whole rape kit testing they do. Not entirely sure though.

There are holes because not everything has come out yet. I don't see the point in trying to judge a case based simply on what's come out in the media. It's better to wait until we get the full story.

The sad part is, even if they are guilty there parents have millions of dollars and they will have the best laywers with unlimited funds. While the DA will have limited funds. I wonder how the case will change if a duke girl got raped by the minorities in the town. Its a sad in society when money and race will get your out of a crime. Not saying they did it, but if they did they should be punished, but it won't happen.

I'm <b>REALLY</b> tired of people making this into a race issue. I'm sick of it in the media, I'm sick of hearing in the bars and everywhere else I go. Now, don't think I'm jumping on you for what you think, I'm just making an observation. I don't think this has anything to do with race. If she was raped then she was raped and hopefully the kids will be punished. The families money doesn't really play a part in this role because (as of right now) there is no real evidence that can prove the girl was raped. By your statements, it seems like you are putting some sort of 'they are guilty' twist on it. I may be off on that assesment, correct me if you wish.

Or it's sad when a black girl falsely cries rape hoping to obtain an enormous cash settlement from a wealthy school and its students.

Posts #1-32 for an excellent example why criminal cases should never be tried in the media. No one here, with the sole exception of someone working for Nifong AND working on the case for him and happens to be a member of this board, has any idea of the evidence that the prosecution has. All the information in the public forum has been provided by the DEFENSE. We have not gotten to the point that the prosecution has to turn over any evidence to the defense. It's entirely possible that these lacrosse players taped themselves raping this woman (not saying such a tape exists, just that it could) and its now in prosecution hands. The defense would certainly not be in a rush to disclose that kind of information to the press, and from what I understand, Nifong has his office under a pretty short leash on this case.

I have no idea whether these kids are guilty or innocent, but there are people making presumptions based on partial evidence that may be misleading. Clearly, the timeline for the alibi of one of the accused makes it look difficult for him to take part in any crime that took place, but it's also entirely possible that the clocks on the cameras that took the pictures were off.

Regardless of the outcome, something happened to the woman at some point that night. Whether it was the lacrosse players that did it or if she was a willing participant in whatever caused the cuts and bruises is something best left to the courts. Enough of the truth will come out at trial.

The_Jazz: You are completely right about how none of us really know what evidence is really out there. However, when you hear what the DA has said it leads me to believe that he really doesn't have a leg to stand on. He went after the DNA because he knew it "would be bulletproof". Those were his statements. After the DNA came back negative, he hasn't said much, why? Because he's trying to find the 3rd Suspect and there isn't much for him to say. Again this is just what I think about the case. There's nothing wrong with trying to analyze a case and see what is going on, especially when someone (me) lives so close to the whole ordeal. I am almost amazed at the veracity the lawyers are taking, could they be fooling me? Possibly, but I just know that if they had any doubt they would be more reserved in most cases.

Also, everything I've seen has the pictures timestamped, not to mention the video surveillance and receipts. I've read and listened to both sides of what has been brought out so far and that's how I make my assumptions. I may be making hasty assumptions but I like to analyze cases and see where I was right or wrong. I always wanted to be a lawyer, so I guess that's just how I live vicariously through the actual lawyers. :shrug:

I'm anxiously awaiting for the Motion of Discovery to be filed so all the cards are on the table. This will give a more rounded look at the case.

First, the prosecution and the defense are both doing exactly what they should be doing. The prosecution is not trying to make its case in the media. Beyond the one statement about the DNA being "bulletproof" what else have you heard about evidence that came out the DA's office. Not very much.

The defense is shouting from the rooftops about how these are good boys and there's all this evidence to prove their innocence. That's called trying to influence the juror pool. Given the legs this case seems to have, there won't be very many people in the area that haven't formed some sort of opinion about it. Guccilvr, since you're in the area, I'm going to pick on you - could you honestly report for jury duty on this case and tell the court that you have NOT formed an opinion? As I've said before, the defense counsel is pretty crafty, and they're handling this well. Could they be fooling you? That depends on what you mean by fooling. They are certainly expounding on their version of the facts, especially the ones that make their clients look good.

As far as the time and date stamps, they could easily be wrong. Who's to say that either the internal clock of the camera keeps accurate time or that they were programed with the accurate time in the first place? My wife programs everything, including her old VCR, 10 minutes fast so that she's on time. It's a habit. That will come out in discovery, I'm sure. If the guy armed with the camera set it to show 12:00 when it was actually 11:45, then that really changes things up for the timeline, doesn't it? I'm sure that the defense would NOT be pointing that out if it were the case.

I think it is pretty safe to assume they are accurate.
I suppose its possible that the boys conspired before hand to rape the strippers so they all synchonized their watches to correspond to the false time programmed into the camera. Possible, but highly improbable.

Could I report for jury duty. I would like to think I could listen to all the evidence and not hold any pre-concieved notions. I also think there can be a motion to hold the trial in a different county if there is some sort of evidence or belief that an unbiased jury could not be found in the preciding county. I know what the defense it doing but I also think they are pretty sure they have a good shot at any trial.. if it even gets that far. I just wonder why nothing has come out of the DA's office. I really am believing it's because they don't have much else. I mean, the girl misidentified the 3rd person. She was shown a group photo of the lacrosse team (and not anyone else) and she made the identifications from that. The case can be thrown out by that fact alone.

As far as the pics go, I think most of them are camera phone pictures. I can't even set the clock on my phone. It's all done through the network. If I fly out west, the time changes for me. :shrug:

I understand what you are trying to say in that we shouldn't make assumptions and just wait for all the evidence to come out. I've also said that perhaps I've made hasty assumptions. I do this with alot of cases though, when I do I usually look at them from a legal standpoint, not a "I believe he's guilty because he looks like he would do it" or other silly ideas.

Have you seen a picture of the watch? It's an analog watch turned at an angle to the camera, at least in the 1 picture that I've seen. It's difficult to see how anyone could possibly tell the time. If it is an analog watch, with a minute hand, I find it difficult to believe that you could tell the accuracy within more than 5 minutes given the picture that the Drudge Report posted last week.

Again, all this information is coming from the defense. The DA has made 2 statements of any note in the last month or so - that they were seeking DNA evidence and that indictments had been issued. The defense revealed the DNA results, not the DA. The defense released these pictures, not the DA. The source is not exactly unbiased. It could very easily be the case that this is all a scam or that these guys raped and beat this woman. My only point is that there's a rush to judgement on partial information.

The defense would never claim the DNA was invalid. That would destroy any credibility for a trial. If there was DNA, the defense would be trying to come up with some sort of consent story I think.

Well they did not want her to ID someone who is not on the team. They should have probably limited the field further to those who they can prove were actually there at the time the alleged rape occured.

They are supposed to show her a wide range of people. As in people not even associated with the team. Not just a group picture of the team itself.

I'm not sure that I understand this statement - do you mean that the DA would never claim the DNA was invalid? I don't see how any defense statements one way or the other would destroy any kind of credibility. The defense can make all the statements it wants outside of court (so can the DA, but that's typically a bad idea) without having to bring anything into the courtroom. You see it done all the time.

And for the record, the defense did claim that the DNA results showed no matches. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2404002 so I really don't get your point.

My statement was in response to this quote

I meant to say that the defense would never claim that there were actual matches to the DNA. That would kill any chance of credibility or other avenues such as consent later on. Since they are blasting away at the DNA evidence, they have killed the consent avenue which makes me believe they are pretty confident in their clients and what evidence they do have/know.

Again, what they say in the media doesn't have to conform to what they say in court. They can blast away at the DNA evidence all they want and then say that any sex was consentual in court. There are no rules against that. They'll look pretty stupid if they do, but that doesn't mean that there might be a valid strategic reason to do it. Again, it is entirely possible that the DA has DNA evidence linking one of these guys to the rape and the defense is setting up a smoke screen. The defense attorneys will look pretty foolish and unreliable if that does prove to be the case, but they may have a strategy here that involves misinformation.

There is no law that says that a defense attorney has to tell the media the truth about his client and their actions and plenty of laws that say that a defense attorney cannot disclose harmful things about his client.

All we have are the defense's interpretation of the DNA results. Its entirely possible that they are only giving us a portion of the facts or that there were inconsistent results in some of the tests. Again, consider the source of information, especially when the DA has basically put a gag order on his entire office with instructions that leaks = pink slips, at least according to what I've read. The DA is treating this very seriously, and the discovery is going to be very interesting. It's also entirely possible that all the charges are going to get dismissed in a month.

Yes I know that there is no law stating they can't go back on issues in court.. but let's face the facts. If the DA did happen to have some DNA linking these kids to a rape, he's going to make damn sure he brings up in court how the defense said there wasn't any and yada yada. A DA can put all the gag orders he wants on his staff, but the leaks will still come through. I guess the DNA question will be settled when the next round comes through.. should be today or tomorrow.

First, let's start with the fact that I agree with you on most of your points in general up to now. However.....

Exactly who do you propose is going to take the stand to defend these statements? Is the DA going to put the defense counsel under oath? To what end? What judge would allow it? Unless one of the defendants gets out of control and says something to that effect in pretrial discovery (which would be monumentally stupid), there's no way to get this kind of statement admitted. As far as facing facts, that's my entire point - what facts are we supposed to face when we don't actually have any? All we have right now is what the defense is saying, and that's not someone that I necessarily choose to believe. The defense counsel has an agenda, and that's to do everything he can to make us believe in the innocence of his client. Maybe the results are what he's saying, maybe not. My entire point is that you shouldn't accept what he's saying as fact



What leaks from the DA's office are you talking about? I haven't heard of any "unnamed sources" in that office making any statements. It's entirely possible that I've missed them, so I'm curious what they've confirmed or denied or even said. That would certainly lend credibility to whatever the defense is saying.

ok..

First, a statement doesn't have to be admissible to have an impact on a jury ;) Even if the judge advises a jury to disregard a statement.. the damage has already been done. Why do you think lawyers say things they know will be thrown out?? Because most jurors just can't forget things. It's a ploy that is used constantly. Like you said, this could very well be the case already. The defense could be pulling this trick now. Also, were the kids to hire a new lawyer, council whatever, the old lawyers could be put on the stand under oath. Not to say they will hire new council, just pointing out that it could happen.

secondly, there aren't any leaks yet. I said that will still come through. That doesn't mean it has occured yet, just that eventually no matter how tight lipped the DA says his office is, the leaks will occur. That's just the way it goes.

Again, I totally understand what you are saying about not accepting what a biased source says as fact. I'm just going with my gut instinct on this one and using what the defense has said as a backup. If something else were to be said to alter my judgements so far I would definately change my mind. I'm just merely pointing out that something has been off from day 1 in this case and I don't see these allegations standing.

Guccilvr, you watch too much TV. Lawyers don't say things that get thrown out very often because it gets them in huge trouble with judges. If you do things like that as a lawyer, you'll find yourself sitting on a mistrial. There's also the issue that if a lawyer does this multiple times, judges will get wise and shut them down before they can even get started on misleading the jury. Remember that these guys see each other constantly in the courtroom, especially in a smaller venue like Raleigh (as opposed to NYC). If you're the top lawyer in town, you aren't going to hold that title very long if all the judges are predisposed against you.

Also, you couldn't put an old lawyer on the stand because of client confidentiality. You can't force a lawyer to reveal anything about a past, present or future client - ever. The exceptions to that rule are so few and far between as to be unworthy of listing.

There may or may not be leaks in the future, but I think that you just helped me prove my point about where all the information is coming from. I completely agree that these kids could be innocent (as I've said several times), but they also could have done it. The DA could also be sitting on DNA proof that they haven't revealed yet that the defense knows about but is deliberately ignoring.

I think that you get my point, so why don't we sit back and see what happens? I agree that the timeline offered is pretty telling if it holds up compared to the rest of the evidence. This may be a huge scam, and strippers aren't exactly known for their law-abiding behavior at the best of times. Then again, maybe these guys did something horrible to her.

Actually, you know what's funny? I don't watch tv at all. I think I might watch about 5 hours of tv a month ;) You can ask several people in chat. They will tell you I think Law and Order and CSI and similar shows are nothing but pure bullshit.

What I'm going on is from friends that I have as lawyers and what I've seen in actual cases. A friend of mine just had a case where they put a lawyer on the stand. Granted it was a huge exception. I was just merely pointing out that it can/could happen, especially as weird as this case is.

If lawyers didn't say things very often that got thrown out, then there would be no need for objections and such. Like I said, I'm just guessing at the craziness that could ensue if this were to ever hit trial.

Sure, you can say I proved your point. I never disagreed with you. I am just going with what I think will be the outcome. If you think I'm a majority in this assumption you would be wrong. Alot of people around here seem to think the kids are guilty.

I am going to wait and see what happens but it's just interesting to me to sort through things and kind of see how I stand at the end.

That is pretty funny about TV. I'm not a lawyer either, although I too thought very hard about it, and I have a bunch of friends that work for some of the big firms in Chicago and New York, including some that are litigators. I'm basing my opinions on what they've told me, which is basically that trying to mislead a jury like we're discussing could lead to a mistrial or even contempt of court fines. They laugh at Law & Order and CSI just like you do (although that doesn't stop some of them from watching those shows).

As far as my "proving my point" statement, I didn't mean to imply that you and I disagreed. That was more for the lurkers.

The lawyer that went on the stand must have been one hell of a case. That's certainly the one-off exception to the rule, and generally lawyers can't be compelled to reveal anything a client tells them even if that client is dead.

Yeah the lawyer friends have said that a mistrial could happen. I doubt it will actually get to that point though.

As far as the case with a lawyer on the stand it was for some sexual assualt case and I don't remember why or the how's he actually got on the stand. I just know that he said it was allowed. (he doesn't go into detail much..it's his way of detaching from work)

I actually enjoy this sort of legal guessing and banter back and forth.

I do not know if they are guilty or if they are innocent, but its just be lawyers. Its not a race thing at all, its a money thing. If you have the best lawyers you have a better change off getting off than if you have a shitty lawyer, i thought that aspect was obvious. It was just in this case the rich kids happended to be white.

vrs

Might want to edit that first post then.

According to a news story this morning, Duke Lacrosse players have broken their silence. There was an interview on ESPN (which I didn't see) on the basis of anonyminity. The players said that there was an argument over the amount of money and how long the girls were supposed to dance, and this is when the girls locked themselves in the bathroom. The players also said that slurs were used during the argument but that no rape occured.

Of course this gives the girl a reason to cry wolf. *I'm not saying that's what she did, just saying it's possible*

Just a small update:

On the news this morning, they reported that this same woman filed a very similar report 10 years ago. She claimed she was sexually assaulted by 3 men. No charges were ever filed after the claim because (according to her mother) she was in fear of her life and did not want to make any statements. Her mother said that this time the woman would testify during a trial.

:hmm: this thing just gets weirder and weirder.

The DA was re-elected.

Count down till the charges are dropped begins now....

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/13/D8M06HMG0.html

I wonder why they're even having a trial?

I heard about this as well. They may not have a trial. I think Mike Nifong was hoping the media would forget about this little gem of his, and then he'd just casually drop charges. :shrug:

I've also heard that a state senator here has made a motion for dismissal for several reasons. I'll have to try and find the article to get the whole story.

Judge OKs defense request for paternity testing of Duke lacrosse rape accuser's child

DURHAM, North Carolina: A judge ordered testing Friday to determine whether three Duke University lacrosse players fathered the child of a woman who accuses them of rape — a prospect defense attorneys dismissed as an "absolute impossibility."

News of the accuser's pregnancy comes roughly nine months after the team party where she says she was raped by three white men, but District Attorney District Attorney Mike Nifong said he believed the accuser became pregnant at least two weeks after the party. The accuser is a black woman.

Defense attorney Joseph Cheshire said Friday the defense, which requested the testing, has known for some time about the pregnancy.

A person familiar with the case, speaking to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity, confirmed the pregnancy late Thursday but had no information about the father.

Testimony at a procedural hearing Friday focused on a defense request for more information about DNA testing conducted for the prosecution.

Defense attorneys have stressed for months that no sex occurred at the party and they have cited DNA testing that found genetic material from several males in the accuser's body and her underwear — but none from any member of the lacrosse team.

The woman has said the three men raped her in a bathroom at a March 13 team party where she had been hired to perform as a stripper.

Medical records included in a defense motion filed Thursday were not made public, but Cheshire said the woman was given a pregnancy test immediately after reporting she was raped — and it was negative — and she took an emergency contraceptive.

"The possibility of her having gotten pregnant (from) these alleged incidents is an impossibility ... an absolute impossibility," Cheshire said.

Cheshire spoke shortly before a previously scheduled hearing in the case.

The defense motion claims the woman misidentified her alleged attackers in a photo lineup that was "an incoherent mass of contradiction and error."

Defense lawyers argue that the key lineup, conducted April 4 at the Durham Police Department, violated departmental policies and the defendants' due process rights because it included only pictures of lacrosse players.

Based in part on those identifications, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans were indicted on charges of rape, kidnapping and sexual offense. All three players have insisted they are innocent and were in court for the hearing Friday, as was Mike Pressler, the head lacrosse coach who resigned after the accusation became public.

"Our loyalty to each other remains and my wife and I are here to support the boys," he said.

Defense attorneys asked a judge to bar prosecutors from using the photo lineup at their clients' trial and prevent the accuser from identifying the players from the witness stand.

There had been no prior indication the woman, a 28-year-old college student who has other children, was pregnant. She has not spoken in public since granting a single interview to the News & Observer of Raleigh shortly after the party.


This is the story that never ends :D

The story never ends.. that's the truth. I just can't figure out why the other charges haven't been dropped. If there's no DNA evidence, how in the world can you drop a rape charge but still pin a forced sexual assault charge on the kids?? If this thing does make it to trial, the prosecution is going to look silly and end up with some serious internal issues. Without even factoring in that a jury is going to be extremely difficult to pool, the fact that the girl is changing stories should make the D.A. drop the charges. His job is not to prosecute everything, his job is to look at facts, and prosecute where there was an actual crime.

Now, I'm not saying it did or didn't happen. Nobody but the people involved really know, I'm just saying that from what I've seen, (which could be a whole lot of smoke) I don't see how in the world the D.A. would let this case make it to trial.

I also found it very interesting to see the different views on this case in the community. Students at NCCU want to see it go to trial (the student population is majority black) while the majority of white people interviewed think the charges should be dropped. This whole case while IMO has nothing to do with race has now,thanks to the local media, turned into a huge racial cesspool. Durham has enough issues as it is already without having a racial dilema on it's hands.

Well it's finally over. IMO the right decision was made. I just feel bad for the guys that had to go through this crap. It just shows how easy it is for women to manipulate the court. (Don't go on a rabbit trail with that statement you all know what I mean)

These guys are fortunate that their families have lots of money to hire some really good lawyers and investigators. I fear that under the same circumstances many would probably be in prison for a long time.

Maybe, maybe not. It's kind of hard to tell, to be honest.

If their families didn't have lots of money, would the accuser have told her tall tale?

I do think the guys had a great lawyer setup, but I still think that any decent lawyer, no scratch that, any public defender would have been able to nail this one down.

I hope these kids are actually able to move on with their lives and that these charges don't define their lives in the future.

Now, it's time for Nifong to step down and the state to de-bar his ass. If there was ever proof that there are alot of prosecutors who only care about their conviction record instead of actually doing what their real job is, this is it.

I'm a little surprised that the state decided not to set charges against the girl. She'll be lucky to avoid a civil suit. Oh and Nifong, his legal troubles are just beginning. You can bet he hasn't seen the last of these kids in court.

the suspicions about the duke players will always remain...

the "accuser" either lied and should be prosecuted and have to pay the players attorney fees or got paid off...

it never ceases to amaze me how the media is always in a rush to accuse followed by a rush to condemn followed by confusion followed by "whoops, we were mislead"

There was a hint about the accuser in the article I read this morning. The judge said something along the lines of him considering allowing charges pressed against her, but that he decided not to "because she may have sincerely believed the various stories she told". Also mentioned in the article was something about the judge having read sealed records pertaining to the accusers history, including mental health status.

Well mental health isn't going to save her in civil suit. I guess it could a little bit, but more than likely, she won't have the caliber of lawyer these kids do.

Why would they sue her? She doesn't have deep pockets? She was wrong in what you did, but civil court is almost always about recouping losses, not assigning blame.

There's going to be a case against Nifong, which will be defended by either the county or the state (depending on the set up). That will only happen after the disciplinary action. If I remember correctly, NC does not claim immunity for wrongful prosecution, but I could be wrong about that. I do know that they're on the low end of the "immunity spectrum" as far as insurance goes.

Even if they only got $5, they can sue her for slander.

Will they? I think they might, but may just let it die.

Nifong is fucked. As far as the immunity factor, a person can sue for Malicious Prosecution in NC, however that is a sticky, sticky road and better served under the federal courts. They would have a much easier time suing for the tort of Abuse of Process, as well as Slander and/or Defamation.

If they were to sue for Malicious Prosecution, they wouldn't really achieve anything because iirc, the law excludes any damages that cannot be measured. Which is what they would be going after (loss of reputation etc)

Of course those are only a few charges that he could face in civil court. Too bad for him, he'll (hopefully) be de-barred by then.

I guess maybe I'm a little too cynical but I think the expensive lawyers and investigators may have stopped the prosecutor and police from hiding or planting evidence against these boys. Its a good thing the state threw the case out. With a local jury these boys may have been convicted anyway just from the accuser's testimony. It appears Nifong pressed the case mostly in order to get their votes.

I have been looking for the article but they estimate that each family spent over a million to mount the defense (lawyers and private investigators). Good thing none of them were poor

After all that money spent, I am sure they will want at least re-imbursement.

Which is why they'd have a better chance going for the other charges I mentioned. If they only go for malicious prosecution, they can't factor in their pain and suffering, loss of reputation etc. They could couple that charge in with others but it would be too sticky I think. If Nifong was convicted of only Malicious Prosecution, they'd be out a ton of cash.