Quote:
Originally Posted by LegalChef
shinerbock:
Since you've come back into the conversation kinda late, why don't you take the time to actually read the posts for comprehension before you reply to me? I can see that you didn't read the part about Sharpton saying on-air that the DA was completely inethical and the players had a good case against him. Well now I've restated it, so you don't have to search. You're welcome. 
Contrary to your own beliefs, everything that I posted about why Sharpton went to Durham can be substantiated. He's been interviewed on TV and in print several times about it. Check the Fox News interview with Bill O'Reilly, for example. The racial tensions that I mentioned have been referred to ad nauseum by countless TV/print reports on this situation. You can actually Google the phrase 'racial tensions in Durham' and find some of the examples I'm talking about. Or you can look it up on the ever-popular Wiki. It goes back decades. These are not my interpretations, these are facts. You've already admitted that the controversey was there before Al was, so uI won't bother to provide a source to back that fact up.
As I've already inferred, the reputation of the lacrosse team doesn't warrant those three guys going to jail for something they didn't do. But the strippers didn't make up that reputation, the players did with their bad behavior and foolish antics. The president of Duke even made references to their reputation himself. Maybe they will take this opportunity to learn how to treat people with decency and respect. Or maybe not.
I question the focus on Sharpton, because there is no thread on here about DA Nifong. Why is that? He's the one who actually behaved without any regard for ethics or the law. All this aggression should be directed at him. That is my interpretation. |
All this aggression should be first directed at the accuser, if we actually believe these boys are innocent.
I read your post, directed at me, which should be sufficient to stand as a basis for my reply. I don't question that racial tension exists in Durham. I question your interpretation that Al Sharpton went down to Durham seeking justice. Simply because he says that is what he accomplished there, doesn't mean his (or your) assertions are in accord with the facts.
Of course the controversy was there prior to him arriving. One can obviously stir and further play on people's emotions during an existing crisis. The fact that there was existing racial tension furthers my concern regarding the way he approached the situation. If racial tension already existed, how is he helping the community by supporting one side over the other, especially without any rational basis for doing so?
Lets suppose that he went to Durham with the intention of ensuring justice on behalf of the accuser. Why would he feel the need to do so? We've established that the city had existing racial tension, but was there any indication that this woman was receiving unfair treatment? Was the legal process too slow for Sharpton? If it was too slow, perhaps that was quite justified, considering what we've learned as the situation proceeded. Even if his intentions were lofty as he proclaims, his conduct was still questionable, in my opinion. First, operating under our previous (and rather optimistic) assumptions, he determined that the risk of injustice was so great in Durham that it required his presence. Second, despite very little evidence, he immediately sided with the accuser. Why would he do so? Quite obviously, because she was a black woman in an area he deemed incapable of adequately providing justice for a minority. Third, he proceeded to rally the black community in the area, pitching them against the school and these boys, spreading further the crevasse already existing within the city.
As for the boys learning to respect others, I think its pretty ridiculous to paint an entire athletic organization with such a broad brush. We have little, if any, indication that these boys in particular did anything inappropriate.
You're obviously welcome to start a Nifong thread if you so choose. However, I really haven't heard anyone defending his conduct, so I doubt it would be as interesting.