Alleged Rape of NCCU Student: (Duke Scandal)

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by GA-Beta

For 15+ pages, you posters condemned the lacrosse team, and the accused players, ignoring all of the evidence and comments from defendents, their team mates, their families, and their lawyers.

Not one bit of incriminating DNA was found, although semen from five others was found on the girl and on her panties - proving her statement "no sex for a week" to be a lie. Not one piece of evidence has been presented, except the ever-changing story of the girl.

I wonder if any of the 15 pages of accusers will now offer an apology, or maybe an "I was mis-informed"?

Seeing how the Duke players are not on here, I'm not sure who you think should get an apology on here.

I never understand that line of thinking.

[shinerbock]

I didn't go back all 15 pages, but I imagine they are saying that the people who were firmly against the Duke kids owe an apology. I don't see an apology as necc, or anything for that matter, but maybe a "I was mistaken" could be appropriate. There were quite a few people who were automatically against these guys for no good reason. Of course, I'm just trying to clarify the previous post, I'm not demanding anyone do anything. I do think it is a valuable lesson regarding taking a side without any evidence to support it.

[jitterbug13]

The parents of the accused were on 60 Minutes last night, with Lesley Stall picking up where Ed Bradley left off. They were pizzed at the prosecutor and Duke for not having their backs when they were first accused. Now that the prosecutor has left the case, I wouldn't be suprised if the all of the remaining charges are dropped. I give them until the end of Feburary.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I didn't go back all 15 pages, but I imagine they are saying that the people who were firmly against the Duke kids owe an apology. I don't see an apology as necc, or anything for that matter, but maybe a "I was mistaken" could be appropriate. There were quite a few people who were automatically against these guys for no good reason. Of course, I'm just trying to clarify the previous post, I'm not demanding anyone do anything. I do think it is a valuable lesson regarding taking a side without any evidence to support it.

I'm simply saying that there isn't anyone to apologize to. The Duke kids aren't on here. I always feel like people who ask like that want an apology for people disagreeing with them in the first place.

[shinerbock]

I agree, its a message board, nobody should be forced to account for their original opinions. Those opinions might look stupid enough as it is.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by jitterbug13

The parents of the accused were on 60 Minutes last night, with Lesley Stall picking up where Ed Bradley left off. They were pizzed at the prosecutor and Duke for not having their backs when they were first accused. Now that the prosecutor has left the case, I wouldn't be suprised if the all of the remaining charges are dropped. I give them until the end of Feburary.

Interesting segment...they harped a lot on the concealing of DNA found in her panties that did not belong to any of the accused. While the prosecutor did some un-ethical things, that was not one of them. AFAIK, the sexual history of a victim is not supposed to be relevant (though I don't know the specific law in NC).

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Interesting segment...they harped a lot on the concealing of DNA found in her panties that did not belong to any of the accused. While the prosecutor did some un-ethical things, that was not one of them. AFAIK, the sexual history of a victim is not supposed to be relevant (though I don't know the specific law in NC).

Didn't he conspire to conceal that information from the defense? Or that's the claim anyway.

It was relevent as the accuser had claimed that a) she claimed not to have had sexual relations with any other men for some period of time around the attack and b)None of it belonged to the players. That is important to the defense of said players! They shouldn't be saying "She slept with John Doe and Steven Roe, and John Smith, etc." but they need to inform the defense about that sort of discovery.

[Jimmy Choo]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Interesting segment...they harped a lot on the concealing of DNA found in her panties that did not belong to any of the accused. While the prosecutor did some un-ethical things, that was not one of them. AFAIK, the sexual history of a victim is not supposed to be relevant (though I don't know the specific law in NC).

While her sexual history is not relevant but since she had orginally claimed prior to being raped she had had no sexual contact for over a week. It has been reported here locally that the DA was required to turn over any info that would point to the boys' innocence and that would have clearly pointed to someone else. And also NC doesn't really have any real rape shield law. I'm sure they have something but not anything like the one in Colorado.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Didn't he conspire to conceal that information from the defense? Or that's the claim anyway.

It was relevent as the accuser had claimed that a) she claimed not to have had sexual relations with any other men for some period of time around the attack and b)None of it belonged to the players. That is important to the defense of said players! They shouldn't be saying "She slept with John Doe and Steven Roe, and John Smith, etc." but they need to inform the defense about that sort of discovery.

I'm not sure. I mean, it speaks to her credibility if it conflicts with anything she said under oath, but taken alone, the fact that she nailed other men has no bearing.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

I'm not sure. I mean, it speaks to her credibility if it conflicts with anything she said under oath, but taken alone, the fact that she nailed other men has no bearing.

I believe that the ethics on Nifong's part are the major issue. I'll see if I can dig up an article on it. Or maybe jon will provide one

[shinerbock]

Whats bad about this is that the person who started this party will walk away unpunished, assuming she was lying.

[Drolefille]

I wonder if the AG will press charges on her for false accusations. AND/OR get her some serious pscyhological help.

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I believe that the ethics on Nifong's part are the major issue. I'll see if I can dig up an article on it. Or maybe jon will provide one

I may have already but:
Opinions: What's in a name?

Printing names can harm both the accused and the accuser..

http://www.statepress.com/issues/200...pinions/699201

Special prosecutor has ties to Nifong
1/17/2007 6:40 AM
By: Associated Press
http://rdu.news14.com/content/top_st...asp?ArID=98356

Rep. King wants federal investigation of Duke DA

BY J. JIONI PALMER
Newsday Washington Bureau

January 17, 2007, 11:05 PM EST

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...-top-headlines

Pols call for U.S. probe of Duke case

BY J. JIONI PALMER
Newsday Washington Bureau

January 18, 2007

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...onalnews-print

[Jimmy Choo]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I wonder if the AG will press charges on her for false accusations. AND/OR get her some serious pscyhological help.

The AG has really avoided anything that remotely resembles an answer on this one. And after the way the case has gone to date I can't say I blame him! However.... I hope he does but I do feel it's highly unlikely. The AG would have to show that she knowingly lied, etc.

[Drolefille]

Quite true, though the number of changes in her story... oy. She needs counseling. She also needs help so she can get through school without stripping, particularly with a baby now involved That just makes it more complex.