Having read through the NY Times account of their interview with DA Mike Nifong, I Boldly Predict that Mr. Nifong is planning to drop the remaining charges against the Duke Three at the Feb 5 hearing, or before. Here is the key excerpt:
Mr. Nifong declined interview requests Friday, but said in an e-mail message that his decision to dismiss the rape charges showed he was “willing to go in whatever direction the evidence takes me.” And in a three-hour interview on Thursday, Mr. Nifong said he would not hesitate to drop all the charges if the accuser expressed doubt about the identity of the men she has accused when she sees all three defendants at a pretrial hearing set for February.
“If she came in and said she could not identify her assailants, then we don’t have a case,” Mr. Nifong said. On the other hand, he continued, “If she says, yes, it’s them, or one or two of them, I have an obligation to put that to a jury.”
...
Although the woman identified three lacrosse players as her rapists from an array of photographs, Mr. Nifong said she would get a better look at them at the pretrial hearing in February. “You can’t always tell from a photograph,” he said, adding, “The only real time that you’re able to say if you have a misidentification is to put the person in the courtroom with the other people.”
Mr. Nifong said he intends to ask the woman about her level of certitude after February’s hearing. “It’s an opportunity to say, ‘Yes, I’m 100 percent certain these are the people who did it,’ ” he said. “It’s also an opportunity to express doubt.” Given the absence of physical evidence, he said, any doubts from the woman could end the prosecution for one or more of the defendants.
As KC Johnson notes, Nifong does not have any obligation at all to present the latest iteration of the accuser's story to a jury. And honestly - if she says "yes, it’s... one or two of them", how can he possibly go to trial after her conclusive ID of all three? A summary of her effort to date with the photo ID process is already crippling to her credibility. And considering how many times the photos of these three have been printed and aired, if she wavers in an identification it is because she wants to waver (or Nifong wants her too). But here is a helpful hint for the courtroom appearance - the three younger, athletic looking men at the defense table are the accused; the older folks are attorneys (Hey - unless the defense puts a few fillers at the table, or some athletic associates).
Setting that aside, the above excerpt reads to me as if Nifong chose an interview with some sympathetic Times reporters to begin laying the groundwork for his eventual surrender.
And why would he do that? There may be several small benefits to Nifong if he collapses the case on his own initiative. First, if he announces during the Feb 5 hearing that, due to newly-discovered uncertainty by the accuser, the remaining charges must be dropped, then the judge will not have to rule formally on the question of whether Mike Nifong orchestrated a photo ID process that was flawed. Keeping such a ruling out of the record may be of small help in a civil suit or disbarment proceeding.
And in a similar vein, by throwing in the case himself Nifong can argue that he has been acting in good faith and simply tried to give his witness her day in court. Again, that is not much, but a little show of belated reasonableness may look better than having the judge formally throw out the photo IDs, thereby forcing Nifong to drop the case unwillingly.
I am convinced that at this point Nifong is simply looking for a resolution that does not include his eventual disbarment and a hefty civil suit against Durham. A long excerpt about his precarious legal situation is here.
Other Bold Predictions are welcome in the comments.
COMEDY CLASSIC:
On Thursday, Mr. Nifong acknowledged knowing about those [DNA] test results before any players were indicted last spring. He also acknowledged that the results were relevant and “potentially exculpatory,” and he said he should have given the results to the defense before May 18, the day he signed a filing that said “the state is not aware of any additional material or information which may be exculpatory in nature.”
But Mr. Nifong denied the defense team’s contention that he had deliberately tried to hide the results or delay their release. Mr. Nifong, who is personally overseeing this case, said that given the volume of evidence he had not realized that he had failed to turn over those specific DNA test results. “That wasn’t something I was concentrating on,” he said.
Don't let the DNA results distract you, Mike! Focus on the big picture, not pesky details.
HE SHOULDA CONCENTRATED HARDER: Fron the Times follow-up on Nifong's suppression of DNA evidence, it is clear that it was not just one May 18 filing that went awry:
As Mr. Meehan and Mr. Nifong now agree, the two discussed all of DNA Security’s main findings, including those that were omitted from the final report, during two meetings in April.
Defense lawyers point to court hearings in which they repeatedly pressed Mr. Nifong to reveal all the evidence he discussed with Mr. Meehan during those two meetings.
According to transcripts of those hearings, Mr. Nifong repeatedly told Judge Smith that there was no evidence discussed during those meetings other than the test results reflected in the DNA Security summary report.
On June 22, when questioned by Brad Bannon — the discovery expert on the defense team — Mr. Nifong denied that Mr. Meehan and he had talked about anything else he had to disclose to the defense.
“The report itself they have,” Mr. Nifong told Judge Smith.
At a hearing on Sept. 22, Judge Smith asked: “So you represent there are no other statements from Dr. Meehan?”
“No other statements,” Mr. Nifong said. “No other statements made to me.”
Defense lawyers also point to a court filing Mr. Nifong signed on May 18, when he gave the defense some 1,200 pages of evidence records, including DNA Security’s 10-page report. “The state is not aware of any additional material or information which may be exculpatory in nature with respect to the defendant,” Mr. Nifong said in the filing. “Should we learn of the existence of any such material or information in the exercise of due diligence, we will notify the defendant.”
Mr. Nifong acknowledged in the interview this week that he was keenly aware of the test results Mr. Meehan had omitted from his report when he signed that court filing on May 18.
He denied, though, any effort to hide the results or delay their release. He has long been known locally for giving defense lawyers open access to his evidence, even before a state law required that. And, he said, even if the test results should have been turned over months earlier, the defense still had the evidence well in advance of any trial date — which had not yet been set.
“So it’s not like this is something we discover on the fourth day of a five-day trial and say, ‘Oh, by the way,’ ” he said. “I mean, that’s not what’s going on.”
Lest there be any doubt, the defense attorneys are getting ready to switch over to offense:
Trial judges in North Carolina have broad authority to impose sanctions when prosecutors violate discovery rules. The state’s criminal discovery law requires prosecutors to share test results, regardless of whether they were delivered in writing or orally. Likewise, the North Carolina State Bar puts the onus on prosecutors to “make timely disclosure” of evidence that “tends to negate the guilt of the accused.”
If these rules are violated, the judge can dismiss charges or hold lawyers in contempt. In extreme cases, North Carolina law allows a judge to remove a district attorney from office for “willful misconduct.”
But the severity of the sanction often turns on whether the error was innocent sloppiness or a deliberate attempt to conceal evidence.
Mr. Nifong insists it was innocent, but defense lawyers are scouring transcripts of hearings and other records to build a case that Mr. Nifong’s error was in fact a calculated strategy to withhold or at least greatly delay the release of crucial evidence. Joseph B. Cheshire of Raleigh, a lawyer for one of the players, said he intended to take “specific legal steps” to seek sanctions or Mr. Nifong’s removal from the case.
Nifong is going down - the question is, how far?
I boldly predict Hillary will withdraw after her 4th place showing in Iowa polls
hedge that with her holding on till New Hampshirites send her the same message
Posted by: windansea | December 23, 2006 at 04:31 PM
I boldly predict Patrick Fitzgerald is going to attempt a similar face-saving maneuver.
Posted by: Dean Esmay | December 23, 2006 at 04:40 PM
I BOLDLY PREDICT that Bush will not pardon Libby prior to a trial and (if necessary) exhaustion of appeals.
From Iraq to taxes, Bush II has attempted to distinguish his Presidency from his father's. He will avoid the Caspar Weinberger comparison.
Posted by: Walter | December 23, 2006 at 04:49 PM
I boldly predict that after Ronnie Earle, Nifong and Ftizgerald, there will be a growing demand to restrict and limit prosecutorial immunity. Moreover, I believe the Courts will continue to erode the broad application of the federal obstruction law.
Posted by: clarice | December 23, 2006 at 05:05 PM
I wonder how even a NYT reporter could be gullible enought to buy the " I wasn't deliberately trying to hide the evidence, I just forgot" line. In fact I am sure the reporter was not that gullible and was forced to include the assertion by some editor looking to be fair to the Prosecutor. Why he did not include the snickers that turned into loud guffaws that immediately followed by all in the room, remains for conjecture.
Dont you think Libby's counsel may want to call Nifong as a witness, given as if this is to stand as an adequate excuse, one could hardly be expected to remember boring details about the wife some blowhard former ambassador to several backwater countries.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | December 23, 2006 at 05:26 PM
Do the Times' readers have a clus about this case The reason Nifong gave that paper this interview (after promising no more media interviews about the case) is because this is the paper that carried his water for him and regulalry hid his malfeasance.
Posted by: clarice | December 23, 2006 at 05:48 PM
**cluE***regularly**
Posted by: clarice | December 23, 2006 at 06:12 PM
I boldly predict that when Clarice initially typed "clus" above, it was a Freudian slip, and that what she was actually subconsciously thinking was exactly what all of us have been thinking, namely that this whole thing was a gigantic legal "Cluster something" from the word go.
Posted by: Daddy | December 23, 2006 at 07:28 PM
Hmmm.
I boldly predict that Nancy Grace of CNN won't touch this story with a 20' pole and will continue to put on-air replacements to substitute for her whenever there are any significant developments.
I boldly predict that if this case got to trial and in Durham that these three defendents will be found guilty because of jury nullification.
I boldly predict that the grand-children of the current residents of Durham will still be paying off the legal liability.
Posted by: ed | December 23, 2006 at 08:16 PM
windansea:
I like how you think and I boldly agree. From your lips to God's ears.
I'm in the category of ABH- Anybody but Hillary.
I boldly predict Obama gets the dem nomination with either Biden or Gore as VP.
Posted by: maryrose | December 23, 2006 at 08:54 PM
Also Edwards as a possible VP in the tradition of "Always a bridesmaid-never a Bride"
Posted by: maryrose | December 23, 2006 at 08:55 PM
If the rumors are true that the accuser has been trying to stop this case, then I agree Nifong is laying the groundwork to dismiss this case provided he can also make it clear to the Durham black community that it was the accuser's decision, not his.
If, on the other hand, the accuser wants to go forward, then I boldly predict that this case will continue until Nifong sees the composition of the jury pool/jury. At this point, a win or a hung jury may be the only way Nifong can avoid disbarment or sanctions, and it appears he is primarily motivated by his own interests.
Posted by: DRJ | December 23, 2006 at 10:13 PM
Next stop for the FA is the witness protection program. Alaska maybe?
Posted by: M. Simon | December 23, 2006 at 10:27 PM
Good ol' crooked prosecutors. Is there anything they can't do?
Posted by: Beto Ochoa | December 23, 2006 at 10:45 PM
this case will never even make it to feb 5th for him to drop it there. for one, the NC Bar has already sent a nice little note to Nifong, and two, Nifong will never risk giving the defense attorneys a crack at the accuser and the DPD investigators.
if you think the lies exposed so far are anything then you have no idea how deep this treachery runs. so even though Nifong has some pretty bad civil (and criminal) exposure so far, he enjoys far greater liabililty protections than his DPD investigators and the lab director. he will never give them a chance to turn (that goes for the accuser too). i bet you the defense has about 20 perjury traps already set.
Posted by: headrock | December 23, 2006 at 10:58 PM
I somewhat boldly predict Precious will stick with her id of the relatively unnattractive, least likeable and most baggage laden member of the trio- Colin Finnerty. That is, unless she's been paying attention(or gets some good advice), in which case she would realize both Finnerty and Seligmann profess to have airtight alibis leaving the unfortunate Evans as the most viable alternative.
Posted by: Smedley Von Barrister III | December 23, 2006 at 10:59 PM
I boldly predict that Nifong will pay no penalty for all his misdeeds in this case. I boldly predict he will remain as District Attorney for a decade or more.
Posted by: David | December 23, 2006 at 11:21 PM
The accuser was found passed out in a car after the "strip" thing. Why wasn't she charged with a DWI? She(or others?) gave a story to get out of the DWI!!! Duke/young guys sounds good to a DA going for the the vote. This go deeper then the DA. The police are there to enforce law. Not help someone get elected. This is how we got Sen. Specter of PA.
Think for a moment, if you save all your life to send your child to Duke or any place. What will your child put on He's resume? Once charged with rape but dropped by the DA by lack of everything.
Posted by: Nike in NY | December 23, 2006 at 11:45 PM
The Chicago Tribune had a story today about dropping the charges (taken from its sister LATimes) that managed to avoid just about all of the important parts known here, thus managing to convey the idea that the three were almost certainly guilty, but the DA just couldn't prove the rape.
It's probably findable on the LAT. Either despicable or totally clueless or possibly both.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie | December 24, 2006 at 01:00 AM
Hmmm.
The accuser wasn't charged with DWI because she wasn't driving. It was the other dancer, Kim, that was driving her (Kim's) car while the accuser was passed out in the passenger seat.
To recap: the reason why the cops were called was because the other dancer (Kim) couldn't get the accuser out of her car.
Posted by: ed | December 24, 2006 at 01:27 AM
12/23/06 AP: Over 40 bodies discovered across Baghdad
Iraqi police said 47 bodies were discovered across Baghdad yesterday, apparent victims of sectarian killings. In other violence, an Iraqi military intelligence officer was killed in a drive-by shooting south of Baghdad, police said.
12/23/06 CBSNews: Top Shiite Cleric Balks at Plan for Iraq
A U.S.-backed plan to form a political coalition of Iraq's Shiites, Sunni Arabs and Kurds _ a glimmer of hope in a nation torn by sectarian violence _ failed to win the crucial support of the top Shiite cleric Saturday.
12/23/06 MNF: Roadside Bomb Strikes MND-B Patrol
An improvised explosive device detonated near a Multi-National Division - Baghdad patrol, killing one Soldier southeast of the Iraqi capital Dec. 23.
12/23/06 MNF: Soldier killed by road side bomb
An improvised explosive device detonated near a Multi-National Division - Baghdad patrol, killing one Soldier southwest of the Iraqi capital Dec. 23. The combat patrol was conducting a combat re-supply mission in order to deliver necessary supplies...
12/23/06 chicagotribune: Hospital says it failed to take care of hurt GI
Walter Reed Army Medical Center will review its procedures after the father of an Illinois soldier wounded in Iraq claimed his son was discharged wearing bloody hospital clothing and disoriented from pain medication, officials said Thursday.
12/23/06 AP: Iraq war has jeopardized Christians in the Mideast - Anglican leader
The Iraq war has endangered the lives of Christians across the Middle East, the Archbishop of Canterbury said in a scathing commentary Saturday that criticized the U.S.-led coalition for ignoring warnings that this would happen.
12/23/06 NYTimes: Shiites employ own solution: Kick Sunnis out of Baghdad
As the United States debates what to do in Iraq, this country's Shiite majority has been moving toward its own solution: making the capital its own. Large portions of Baghdad have become Shiite in recent months, as militias press...
12/23/06 itv: Five killed in US air strike
Five people have been killed and 17 wounded, after a US air strike destroyed a house in a city north of Baghdad, according to residents. It has been claimed that the planes attacked the al-Mafraq area, west of Baquba.
12/23/06 Reuters: Gunmen assassinate tribal figure in Mosul
Gunmen assassinated Wathaah Abid-Rabbuh, a tribal figure from the large mainly Sunni Jubour tribe, in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, a hospital official there said. It was not clear why the tribesman was targeted.
12/23/06 Reuters: Iraqi solidier killed in Tikrit
An Iraqi soldier was killed by insurgents in the small town of Dour, near Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit, north of Baghdad, police said.
12/23/06 Reuters: Policeman killed in Samarra
A policeman was shot dead by insurgents in the town of Samarra, police said.
12/23/06 Reuters: Two bodies found in Diwaniya
Police said they found two bodies, blindfolded and with their hands tied, in Diwaniya on Friday, police said.
12/23/06 Reuters: Gunmen kill Iraqi intelligence officer in Diwaniya
Gunmen killed an Iraqi intelligence officer in the southern Iraqi city of Diwaniya, police sources said.
12/23/06 Reuters: Roadside bomb kills 2 civlians in Hawija
A roadside bomb killed two civilians as their car passed a road just outside the town of Hawija, 70 km (45 miles) southwest of Kirkuk, police said
12/23/06 DoD Identifies Marine Casualties (part 2)
Lance Cpl. Ryan L. Mayhan, 25, of Hawthorne, Calif...died Dec. 21 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province...assigned to 3rd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms
12/23/06 DoD Identifies Marine Casualties (part 1)
Lance Cpl. Ryan J. Burgess, 21, of Sanford, Mich...died Dec. 21 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province...assigned to 3rd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms
12/23/06 middle-east-online: US wounded in Iraq try to live with new disabilities
Corey Smith, 19, a native from the midwestern state of Michigan, was injured on September 11 while stationed in Ramadi, an insurgent stronghold 70 miles west of Baghdad...lost both legs and one arm in a roadside explosion in Iraq
12/23/06 Reuters: Five killed in Sadr militia clashes
CLASHES between Iraqi security forces and Shi'ite militiamen loyal to cleric Moqtada al-Sadr have left five people dead and wounded 17 others in the usually calm city of Samawa, police sources said on Saturday.
12/22/06 AP: Iraqi Group Offers U.S. One-Month Truce
The purported leader of an al-Qaida-linked militant group offered U.S. troops a one-month truce for withdrawing from Iraq without being attacked, according to a speech posted on an Islamic Web site Friday.
12/22/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Spc. Robert J. Volker, 21, of Big Spring, Texas, died Dec. 20 in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his HMMWV. He was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment...
12/22/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Spc. Scott D. Dykman, 27, of Helena, Mont., died Dec. 20 in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries suffered from an improvised explosive device. He was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne...
12/22/06 AP: Marine from Hope dies while serving Iraq
The family of Lance Cpl. Ryan J. Burgess, of Hope, was notified Thursday of his death earlier in the week, the Midland Daily News reported. The Defense Department had not released any information about Burgess as of midday Friday.
12/22/06 MCT: Militia members kidnapped Imam
Militia members kidnapped a Sunni mosque Imam Emad Al Shamari from Al Bunouk neighborhood.
12/22/06 MCT: Gunmen attack civilian car in Baquba
gunmen attacked a civilian car using machine guns. The attack claimed the life of one woman, Hiba Abdullah, and caused serious injuries to her two year old son Mohammed Ahmed ... Around the same time gunmen assassinated Safaa Nusseif
12/22/06 MCT: 12 bodies found in Baghdad
Police said that they found 12 dead bodies all over Baghdad. The corpses carried multiple gunshots. 4 bodies found on Rusafa side, eastern side. 8 bodies found on Karkh side, western side
12/22/06 Reuters: Former parliament member killed in Samarra
Ahmed al-Yaseen, brother of Sunni Accordance Front parliament member Abdel Kareem al-Yaseen, was killed along with his wife when a car bomb exploded in front of his home in Samarra. His four children were also wounded, police said.
12/22/06 Reuters: Two policemen killed by roadside bomb in Samarra
Two policemen were killed when a roadside bomb targeted their patrol in central Samarra, 100 km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, police said.
12/22/06 Reuters: Body of a hospital employee found in Kut
Police found the body of a hospital employee after gunmen abducted him on Thursday in Aziziya, 75 km (50 miles) south of Baghdad.
12/22/06 Reuters: Roadside bomb kills one civilian, wounds 7 in central Baghdad
One civilian was killed and seven wounded when a roadside bomb exploded near the national theatre in central Baghdad, police said.
12/22/06 Reuters: Iraqi Shi'ite leaders head to Najaf to avert crisis
Leaders of Iraq's Shi'ite Alliance, acknowledging a looming government crisis, will go to the holy city of Najaf to meet top clerics they hope can help save their fractious coalition, officials said on Friday.
12/22/06 Reuters: Iraq town has little faith in US trial of Marines
Iraqis in Haditha, where 24 unarmed civilians were killed last year, said on Friday four U.S. Marines charged with their murder should be executed, a penalty they will not face in the United States.
12/22/06 MNF: MND-B patrol targeted - 1 Soldier killed and another wounded.
An attack against a Multi-National Division – Baghdad patrol killed a Soldier west of the Iraqi capital Dec. 22. The Soldiers came under sporadic small arms and indirect fire during a patrol. One Soldier was kille
Posted by: sam | December 24, 2006 at 02:12 AM
I boldly predict Nifong will pay a high price for his malfeascence. The defendants have lawyered up big time and are ready to launch a suit that may make it to the Supreme Court.
If that happens, I boldly predict Roberts, Alito, and company are not going to rule in favor of the defendants in said lawsuit.
I never thought any lawyer was capable of giving lawyers a bad name (or, I thought it couldn't get any worse than current reality). Nifong has made the impossible possible.
Off topic warning- MERRY CHRISTMAS!
Posted by: Elroy Jetson | December 24, 2006 at 02:33 AM
I Boldly Predict that eventually, Nifong is elected to Congress as a Democrat and ends up on the Intelligence Committee.
Posted by: Clyde | December 24, 2006 at 03:08 AM
Sam, take it some place else. We can google the news on our own.
Posted by: Clyde | December 24, 2006 at 03:09 AM
BP: If the case goes to trial it will be a non jury trial at the insistence of the defense.
Posted by: Oxbay | December 24, 2006 at 03:53 AM
""""“If she says, yes, it’s them, or one or two of them, I have an obligation to put that to a jury.”""
So if they can prove these guys were on identity, seen before millions of people, at the time of the alleged crime. NiFong still must take her word, regardless of how little credibility she has. No wonder the Democrats like this guy.
Posted by: Patton | December 24, 2006 at 06:38 AM
Sam is doing a great service. He continues to list brave Americans and those fighting on Americas side that ACTUALLY FULLY SUPPORT THE WAR AND THE COUNTRY. As opposed to Sam, these soldiers are his WORST argument for his position.
What he should be listing is all the politicians and pundits that supported the war, and then cut and ran and trashed our military servicemen and women.
These soldiers are all volunteers that have had every opportunity to not go to Iraq if they so choose. They didn't have to enlist, re-enlist, etc. unlike when the Democrats drafted everyone except their political buddies.
It would be nice if Sam list the support taking care of Saddam Hussein then trashed America and the troops like Durbin, Kerry, Kennedy, etc. But Sam won't trash the cowardly scum because he's on their side.
Sam believes our service people are evil and are always a minute away from torturing a baby to death. You see this all the time with Liberals, they trash the troops, spit on them, call them torturers and baby killers and terrorists, but when it suites their political goal, they don't hesitate to try to act like they fully support those very same people they just trashed.
Kerry is a prime example of Samism.
He simultaneously manages to repeatedly say how much he suppots out troops, but allways gets in a dig at them, either they are terrorists, torturers, sadists, war criminals, or too stupid to do anything else.
But in the mind of a Kerry or a Sam, they don't have a moral compass that points out their complete and utter inconsistentency.
Kerry in the same breadth can tell you he proudly wore the countries uniform to torture innocent civilians and doesn't see any problem with the sentence.
But Sams entire schtick is a lie.
Because you are using the deaths of those that support the war to support your argument to end the war - what could be a bigger lie, and be more insulting to our soldiers then to use their ultimate sacrifice to oppose their deepest held beliefs. You may want to attend a funeral or two of our soldiers before you abuse their memories in such a cavalier fashion.
In case that doesn't sink in Sam, it would be like posting the deaths of homosexuals who die of AIDS in order to oppose homosexuality. Certainly those that died did not oppose homosexuality, yet you would abuse their memory to score political points.
Stay tuned, tommorrow Sam will post all the casualities from WWII to argue that the Holocaust should have been allowed to continue
Posted by: Patton | December 24, 2006 at 06:42 AM
I boldly predict that "sam" will continue his childish ways, but yet never reach his goal of self importance.
Maybe his year's resolution will be to get up the nerve to move out of his mothers basement.
Posted by: Bob | December 24, 2006 at 07:41 AM
The police are there to enforce law. Not help someone get elected. This is how we got Sen. Specter of PA.
How so?
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 24, 2006 at 08:56 AM
I suspect since these lacrosse players are from New Jersey and New York, we will see huge lawsuits against not only NiFong, who should be presently being reviewed for being disbarred. They will sue everyone else including the county, the police, the DNA lab, etc.
Durham will never forget the day they put the idiot NiFong in office.
Posted by: Patton | December 24, 2006 at 08:59 AM
I regret that I waited so long to weigh in, thus allowing David to pre-empt (sort of) my bold prediction: Nifong will suffer no civil or criminal penalties. I stop short of predicting that he'll be in office another ten years.
Does anyone else realize that defendant Collin Finnerty's father's name--Kevin Finnerty--is the name of the guy whose identity Tony Soprano got stuck with in his dream sequence last season? The salesman guy who cheated the Buddhist monks on their air conditioning equipment? Jesus--what does it all mean?
Posted by: Other Tom | December 24, 2006 at 09:00 AM
Does anyone know whether a pardon of Libby, as opposed to an acquittal, affects his ability to recover his attorneys' fees from the government?
Posted by: Other Tom | December 24, 2006 at 09:01 AM
Nifong did not respond to a request for comment last week, and he declined to come out of his office on Friday when reporters asked him to talk about the rape charge dismissal. He has told The News & Observer that he would not discuss the case outside of court. But on Thursday, he granted The New York Times a three-hour interview, the newspaper reported Saturday.
Hmmm. NYT's is such a joke anymore, they are the preferred PR firm.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 24, 2006 at 09:06 AM
I boldly predict that TM will disown this post from last April and lead the charge to reinstate the lacrosse program. Still think the players should have been more cooperative with the DA?
What the heck, I always assumed someone else hacked your site and impersonated you in this post, no?
Posted by: capitano | December 24, 2006 at 10:42 AM
Affirmative action for middle class white kids. That ranks up with the 70% prediction in my books.
Merry Christmas TM, for all you do and the same to all the regulars here too. I am out.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | December 24, 2006 at 11:42 AM
Fair point, Capitano. But most everyone missed the ball out of the gate. As I commented on the post you link above: "TM...Where will you stand on the forced compliance with Nifong when the stripper/escort drops her accusations? And she will, as is she has ID'd a player who was not present as a rapist. They may well be assholes, but they are not rapists. Strange that you treat a claim with no factually backing so credibly." I think Tom has recovered better than most. Listening to the midget clown Lupica sputter on ESPN this morning was amusing. He is very upset that the media was mislead(by Nifong), and falsely condemned the players. Seems to have decided that reporters have no responsiblity to investigate the stories they report. Nifong is scum, so are the lazy Jayson Blairs across the country that bought his story hooker, lineup, sinkhole.
Posted by: abe shorey | December 24, 2006 at 11:55 AM
One would have to wonder what communications the DA office has had with the accuser.
Given that Nifong:
1. set up a crooked ID for her to use to make sure only players were among the choices and
2. his repeated drives to the DNA lab (why not use a phone??) to
set up the DNA results,
3. and his dealings with the cab driver who had a charge pending;
4. and his dealings with the other dancer who also had a charge pending;
I would not doubt that their discussions with her have also been shady.
I can't see how Nifong is protected from liability if he willfully acted to deny these boys their civil rights.
The FBI is not amused.
Posted by: Patton | December 24, 2006 at 12:35 PM
As for Sam, since it is the holiday season, I will be charitable. Sam is just like John Kerry. He has a psychological problem with people in the service that actually fight for what they believe in.
John Kerry was, after all, a COWARD. He joind up to serve strictly so he could return home and run for office. He thought he would have an easy go because the navy was just patrolling the coast. But after he got there they changed the mission, and Kerry couldn't take it. So he set up his Purple Heart scam to get the hell out, ...to cut and run. Everyone knows his three Purple Hearts were a scam, and the swiftboaters actually real men of courage
had the audacity to actually hold him accountable. Kerry and much of the media still seeth at them, highly decorated combat veterans that exposed Kerry's cowardice.
From his cowardice also comes his loathing
for the military and the servicemen. He psychologically, perhaps not even understanding why, needs to tear down service men to attempt to build himself up.
Remember when Kerry was asked about an all volunteer military, he found the concept, LOATHSOME. That there would be men that would put their lives on the line willingly
was loathsome to him, and his cowardice makes him hate them, because he isn't capable of believing in something more important then himself.
So the Kerrys, Durbins, Kennedys and Sams of the world have to tear down the military man. They couch it in all types of excuses and obfuscations, but it really comes down to their own cowardice to believe in a fight for freedom and liberty against tyranny.
Sorry if I was a little too charitable, must be the holiday spirits.
Posted by: Patton | December 24, 2006 at 12:59 PM
Given Nifongs position....if the women called him today and said..."you know, I just realized they did use their penises
when they raped me vaginally'...he would have to re-instate the charges on Tuesday
morning. And if she decided she couldn't remember on Thursday, he would have to drop them on Friday.
Posted by: Patton | December 24, 2006 at 01:03 PM
In re Sam--if you don't feed the trolls, they'll go away. Really, I know its hard to resist sometimes, but ignoring them completely really is very effective!
Posted by: McGee | December 24, 2006 at 01:38 PM
Seneca emailed me this "Megan Kendall is just reporting that a state pol in NC is
going to file a complaint to remove Nifong from the lacrosse case for
malfeasance. "
I have no further info.
Posted by: clarice | December 24, 2006 at 03:12 PM
This is off-Topic, but does support Patton's
post concerning John Kerry, who surrendered to the North Vietnamese in his meeting with them, in Paris. See his testimony 22 Apr 1971, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; and now
apparently, has surrendered to Syria. Along with one of his co-surrenderers, Sen Dodd.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/22/AR2006122201182.html
Sen Dodd's comments are in the Des Moines, Ia. Paper
Posted by: Pagar | December 24, 2006 at 05:24 PM
Durham in Wonderland today dissects Nifong's various alibis..they are inconsistent and lame.
Posted by: clarice | December 24, 2006 at 05:53 PM
I understand Patrick Fitzgerald is thinking of charging the alleged non-rape victim with perjury and obstruction for her failure to remember everything accurately. I mean how could you not remember something like that?
Posted by: Patton | December 24, 2006 at 09:33 PM
Nifong and "Precious" have one thing in common: They both change their stories with each successive telling.
We've all heard the saying, "No man or 'exotic dancer' has a good enough memory to be a successful liar."
Posted by: PaulL | December 24, 2006 at 10:18 PM
I mean how could you not remember something like that?
That's different.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 25, 2006 at 12:39 AM
I predict Jesse Jackson will not make another comment about this case unless all charges are dropped. He will then make some general charges about this situation proving there is racism in America.
Ditto some women's rights group. Dropping these charges will intimidate other victims from going forward.
These guys will all get good jobs (from Duke alums) although for a while they are going to have a hard time getting girls to go out with them (aside from the standard Lyle Menendez-marrying types).
Precious will live an upstanding life out of the public eye, much like Rodney King has done. She will have several more children.
Posted by: MayBee | December 25, 2006 at 08:50 AM
Well, Precious should have a good Christmas, but Father's Day is going to be quit confusing at the Precious household.
Posted by: Patton | December 25, 2006 at 10:37 AM
From the Charlotte News-Observer:
“The State Bar has received multiple complaints demanding that he be disbarred. A congressman has called on the U.S. Justice Department to investigate him. And when the case returns to court, Nifong might have to explain repeated misrepresentations to judges about what evidence he had and why he did not disclose it all, as state law requires.”
Read it all here:
http://www.newsobserver.com/100/story/525091.html
Posted by: Other Tom | December 25, 2006 at 02:04 PM
Anyone have a good picture of Precious? A clothed one, where you can see her body?
Posted by: TCO | December 25, 2006 at 02:37 PM
From the Newsobserver story cited above by Other Tom;
"" Meehan hired a lawyer to defend the actions of his lab. In an interview, the lawyer, Fred Antoun, said the defense lawyers were wrong to demand a report with all results included. The results could be found in the roughly 1,800 pages of technical documents that a judge ordered them in September to produce; the defense received them in late October.
"That is a childlike complaint," said Antoun, who practices in Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C. "The DA did hand it over; it just wasn't written in moron talk."
Antoun defended Meehan's partial report on several grounds: Reporting all the tests would result in a massive report that no one could understand. It would violate the privacy of the players, whom Antoun kept referring to as "soccer players." And listing all the test results would sully the reputation of the accuser, he said.
Antoun is not licensed to practice in North Carolina, where the law requires experts to write up a report of any test they perform."
Given the fact that the liberals
apparently believe; What Atty Antoun stated-
"listing all the test results would sully the reputation of the accuser".
I predict we will soon see an announcement
that Nifong will be the Democrat candidate for a Senate seat from North Carolina.
Posted by: pagar | December 26, 2006 at 10:20 AM
Durham in Wonderland has now posted relevant portions of the transcript of Meehan's examination. Unbelievable!
http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2006/12/meehan-transcript.html
Posted by: clarice | December 26, 2006 at 10:24 AM
Although the woman identified three lacrosse players as her rapists from an array of photographs, Mr. Nifong said she would get a better look at them at the pretrial hearing in February. “You can’t always tell from a photograph,” he said, adding, “The only real time that you’re able to say if you have a misidentification is to put the person in the courtroom with the other people.”
Excuse me just a Second!!! I thought that the woman ID'd these guys from a line up not photographs. So what give? Nifong is either lying or he screwed up yet again.
The man needs to be disbarred. And that is exactly what the families of these guys out to go do.
Posted by: JohnMc | December 26, 2006 at 06:33 PM
She identified them from a photo array entirely composed of only white Duke Lacrosse team members..An array illegal under N Car law and federal law for the obvious reason that whoever she picked it was like fishing in a barrel.
I do believe the court has no choice but to throw out that identification and bar her from identifying them in court.
Posted by: clarice | December 26, 2006 at 06:37 PM
Frankly, I think Nifong, "the accuser" (who I didn't realize till the latest story was a whore), and probably the lead investigator should be charged under federal law with conspiring to violate the civil rights of the accused.
And Nifong, in view of his statements to the court about evidence, should probably go down for perjury as well.
Posted by: Stephen M. St. Onge | December 26, 2006 at 06:40 PM
Why do I find the concept of identifying them "better"- while they sit in the courtroom in suits in the defendants' seats- kinda laughable?
Posted by: MayBee | December 26, 2006 at 07:00 PM
I mean, don't you see her saying, "Oh, those three guys in the suits are the ones whose pictures I pointed to? Yeah. Looks about right to me."
Posted by: MayBee | December 26, 2006 at 08:20 PM
They should drag some bystanders in to sit in the defendants' chairs.
Actually, this is why the prosecution should be barred from providing any id..Her testimony is ineluctably tainted by the illegal photospread.
If she isn't allowed to id them in court, Nifong will have to make the case on other evidence --well, of course he hasn's any..
Posted by: clarice | December 26, 2006 at 10:56 PM
If it comes down to it, the players lawyer should have three of four twenty-something young lawyers sitting with and between the player/defendants and let her try to identify them.
I suspect Nifong would object and insist the defendants sit in court in full lacrosse gear with their names tatooed on their foreheads.
Posted by: Patton | December 27, 2006 at 07:47 AM
"""And listing all the test results would sully the reputation of the accuser, he said."""
Say whaaaat? If you are a prostitute, I would think the resuts would be good for business/reputation. Apparently she has a lot of satisfied customers.
Posted by: Patton | December 27, 2006 at 07:50 AM
I once had a good buddy whose entire practice (almost) was DUI cases in L.A. Any time an exec of a corporate client got picked up a DUI I would refer him to this guy. One time the client disappeared (probably shitfaced) a few hours before a hearing. My guy hired a distinguished-looking actor to show up in a nice suit looking very contrite. He just stood there, head bowed, throughout the proceedings, never said a word, and my buddy never represented to the court that this was actually his client. Pleaded the guy out, and all went home happy. The practice of law is an art, not a science.
Posted by: Other Tom | December 27, 2006 at 08:26 PM
HEH! Hurray for Hoolywood!
Soon, we have to Play Wells:How do you put on the defense? What's the game plan?
He's very bright. I doubt we can fathom his strategy but it would be fun to try our hand at it.
Posted by: clarice | December 27, 2006 at 08:29 PM
Hilarious, OT.
Posted by: MayBee | December 27, 2006 at 08:32 PM
I forgot to mention that the actor got paid $200, which showed up on the bill as "professional services."
Concerning Wells and his strategy, I haven't a clue. I do think, however, that those of us on both sides of the political divide will be disappointed if we are looking for political red meat. I don't think we'll see either Wilson or Cheney get disgraced on the stand.
Posted by: Other Tom | December 28, 2006 at 09:53 AM
New Prediction.
In the next few weeks, there will be a picture of John Edwards holding Precious's newborn baby. No wait...changing it's diaper. He is just that helpful.
Posted by: MayBee | December 28, 2006 at 09:56 AM
TM, have I missed it but I don'r reacll you saying anything regarding that lying, cowardly weasel Joe Wilson reisting his supoena from Libby's defense attorney ???
Posted by: Fred Gregory | December 28, 2006 at 12:07 PM
While there is apparently (and rightly so) many looking at Nifong's conduct. There are other cases that need attention;
http://www.friendsoftheborderpatrol.com/pdf/TNA_Ramos_Compean.pdf
This case needs attention IMMEDIATELY.
Decent Border Patrol agent's lives being destoyed to send the message; don't defend our border. Convicted on the word of an illegal,who's importing drugs in the United States. Who's suing the United States for $5 million for violating his civil right to destroy the United States. If he wins his suit, which he probably will, as the agents
were convicted, YOU, as an American taxpayer, will be paying an illegal for breaking American laws. Insanity at the highest level.
Posted by: Pagar | December 28, 2006 at 12:18 PM
From yahoo news
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 28, 2006 at 06:17 PM
N.C. bar files charges against Duke D.A.
What exactly is the N.C. bar?
The MA bar is made up of every lawyer admitted to practice in MA. We don't file things as a body. The MA bar association is a voluntary association that has elected officers. Did the NC bar association vote to file charges? Or is there a separate entity called the NC bar? And if so under whose name were the charges filed? Or am I missing something?
Posted by: Jane | December 28, 2006 at 08:07 PM
The Complaint against Nifong is here:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2006/1228062bar1.html
Posted by: clarice | December 28, 2006 at 08:18 PM
K.C. Johnson analyses the Complaint and says (a) more is coming (b) Nifong's career is over.
Posted by: clarice | December 28, 2006 at 08:26 PM
Hmmm.
I think the term "N.C. Bar" is shorthand for the "N.C. Bar Ethics Board". Or some such thing.
Posted by: ed | December 28, 2006 at 09:12 PM
No. It appears to be a bar association to which all state lawyers must belong and which by state law has the right to determine fitness to practice and ethics complaints.
Posted by: clarice | December 28, 2006 at 09:20 PM
The bar took its good old sweet time about it, didn't they, considering the basis of their complaint is from statements made in MARCH.
Interesting that the complaint comes out now, when everyone and his mother is abandoning Nifong.
Would this complaint have ever been rendered without the recent revelation in court of conspiracy to withhold exculpatory evidence? Or is the bar engaged in covering their asses?
Posted by: PaulL | December 29, 2006 at 01:14 AM
No. It appears to be a bar association to which all state lawyers must belong and which by state law has the right to determine fitness to practice and ethics complaints.
We don't have mandatory membership to the state bar association here, altho I've heard some states do. I wonder if the NC state bar is affiliated with the ABA, or if it is a whole different animal. It seems odd that it is charged with determining the fitness of its own members. That's quite incestuous.
Posted by: Jane | December 29, 2006 at 06:54 AM
""Nifong told ESPN: "One would wonder why one needs an attorney if one was not charged and had not done anything wrong.""""
Well, Mike, I have a two word answer to that:
'Mike Nifong', or 'Patrick Fitzgerald'
Posted by: Patton | December 29, 2006 at 09:08 AM
"""In the next few weeks, there will be a picture of John Edwards holding Precious's newborn baby. No wait...changing it's diaper. """"
I am sure Precious shops at Walmart, so Edwards will be torn between supporting her life choices and propping up an evil corporation. My guess is Edwards embraces Precious in public and sends his un-paid help to shop at Walmart under the cover of darkness.
Posted by: Patton | December 29, 2006 at 09:13 AM
Jane, I belong to three bars all of them mandatory and all of them, like NC, have statutory rights to determine fitness to practice and to institute disciplinary proceedings.
Posted by: clarice | December 29, 2006 at 09:47 AM
I belong to three bars all of them mandatory and all of them, like NC, have statutory rights to determine fitness to practice and to institute disciplinary proceedings.
Really? WOw! Well I guess it doesn't surprise me that MA once again is the odd man out. Hey it's not even mandatory here to report when you drown someone!
Posted by: Jane | December 29, 2006 at 11:10 AM
Hey- who hiked up the spam filter again? Is everyone getting it, or just me?
Posted by: Jane | December 29, 2006 at 11:11 AM
I got it everytime I posted yesterday, Jane.
Posted by: clarice | December 29, 2006 at 11:32 AM
I changed my email address and it stopped.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 29, 2006 at 01:33 PM
NiFong is going down and it just proves what hubris has been at play in this case. I agree the tent will be folded by Feb.5th and then the real prosecutorial malfeasence allegations will commence. The damages awarded are going to be huge for ruining all these young mens' reputations.
Posted by: maryrose | December 29, 2006 at 03:13 PM
Then we can concentrate on the Delay, Libby and Haditha travesties of justice.
Posted by: clarice | December 29, 2006 at 03:17 PM
I've not followed this case closely so here is what I'm wondering: Would the outrage aimed at Nifong be as pronounced if the defendants were poor?
I know that's an ugly question. And frankly I think most prosecutors are honorable, but all of this doesn't seem so much more outrageous than anything else we would see if we watched closely. Most people just have to wait for the "not guilty".
And no, none of that makes it right.
Posted by: Jane | December 29, 2006 at 07:47 PM
"Would the outrage aimed at Nifong be as pronounced if the defendants were poor?"
That could be stood on its head,would the case have been brought if they had been poor?
Posted by: PeterUK | December 29, 2006 at 08:13 PM
On the bright side justice can be done
Posted by: PeterUK | December 29, 2006 at 08:16 PM
I don't know Jane, because I don't think the charges would have been brought against them had they been poor.
Changing a variable in the circumstances makes it a whole 'nother case, with possibilities of other outrages, but not the same ones.
And frankly I think most prosecutors are honorable, but all of this doesn't seem so much more outrageous than anything else we would see if we watched closely.
This sentence seems entirely at odds with itself, unless I am reading it incorrectly.
Posted by: MayBee | December 29, 2006 at 08:17 PM
Ronnie Earle, Nifong, Fitzgerald..
Posted by: clarice | December 29, 2006 at 08:28 PM
Good news for Sam he's not alone
Posted by: PeterUK | December 29, 2006 at 08:44 PM
MayBee,
I think the charges would have been brought if they were poor, and the defendants would probably have copped a plea by now - unless of course you make the case that Nifong would have actually paid attention to how un-credible the victim is if the defendants were poor. I doubt that for some reason.
As for the second sentence, I do think other prosecutors say the kinds of stuff that the complaint outlines. I just don't think it gets highlighted in the same way, because that takes attention and money. And yeah it's wrong, but defense lawyers says a lot of stuff too. We don't have a gag order on trials the way that Canada does. And everyone spins.
The real issue concerning, Nifong, Earle and Fitzgerald seems to boil down to the fact that they all seem to be putting politics in front of justice. Altho Nifong's breach can be distinguished because his is more for personal power via politics than left/right politics.
I dunno. I absolutely understand the outrage against Nifong, even at arm's length. And I don't take issue with it. But it's just one of those things that make me go hmmmmmmm.
Posted by: Jane | December 29, 2006 at 09:54 PM
Jane,
You've got one: the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers.
Every state has one for attorneys (and most for hairdressers). It's becoming more and more rare to have a voluntary state organization alongside the mandatory attorney-dominated (In economics we call this 'regulatory capture'.) state bar.
I used to sit on the ABA Law Student Board of Governers. In some states, it's actually mandatory that all law students become members of the ABA for three years in order to earn the right to practice.
In California, we recently had a revolt and fees were lowered across the board, ethics enforcement budgets were slashed, and enrollment in (and payment for) the advocacy functions of the mandatory state bar was made voluntary. The bar itself is a non-profit organization. The ethics function is run by the State Bar (subject to the CA Supremes and the Circuit Courts of Appeal).
In Missouri, by contrast, the entire she-bang is run by the Supreme Court and delegated to a state-run bar. A bit closer (temporally, spacially, and thus functionally) to your MA experience.
I've yet to fully comprehend the Brit's model, but I believe it resembles MA's.
Posted by: Walter | December 29, 2006 at 09:57 PM
And let's not talk about New York, where the Supreme Judicial Court can be over-ruled by a mere court of appeal....
Posted by: Walter | December 29, 2006 at 10:00 PM
In D.C. it's run by big firm members who spend out money on big picture fancy dancy ideas, urging everyone to do pro bono work and very little practical assistance. For example, each clerk of court has his/her own special rules re filings. Most small practitioners would help out the poor, if only the bar association would put out a form and rule book so that you didn't waste countless hours on trying to find this out.
It's especially needed as most lawyers here specialize in very limited federal practice areas and have no easy way to ferret out this information even if they can do an adoption or a simple will or a quiet title case..
Wisconsin had the first mandatory bar and there was a big fight about using the dues for political reasons..But at the time they started it at least, they had such a form/opractice book and even as a law school student I was able to do a lot of that work for an atty whose office I worked in.
Posted by: clarice | December 29, 2006 at 10:16 PM
BTW Saddam's dead.
Posted by: clarice | December 29, 2006 at 10:43 PM
Ronnie Earle, Nifong, Fitzgerald..
It looks to a busy Jan/Feb
http://www.newschannel5.tv/News/Other/5217/DeLay-prosecutors--appeal-set-for-Jan--24-hearing
BTW...I truly hope that all JOMer's - even the lukers - had a fantasmo holiday and party like it's 2007 on Sunday! I keep forgetting to well wish!
BTW Saddam's dead.
Hot diggity dog!
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 29, 2006 at 10:51 PM
Lurker!
Arggh!
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 29, 2006 at 10:52 PM
Notice you all are talking oversight for outta control Gov. Prosecutors...seems to me that private sector lawyers face even less repercussions - since it's a good old boys club mentality even when lawyers recognize egregious behavior of their peers...and expensive and daunting for the screwed P or D.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 29, 2006 at 11:11 PM
Topsecretk9,
As I'm on a Milne kick, I'd like to cite his take on spelling:
At least for myself, with no reference to existing or fictional avatars implied.
Best wishes for an even more prosperous new year. And bygones.
Posted by: Walter | December 29, 2006 at 11:28 PM
Walter
WtP
And NO Kidding, I had him pegged as a Libra...and bygolly...Sun in Libra
http://koti.mbnet.fi/neptunia/pooh1.htm
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 29, 2006 at 11:44 PM