Powered by TypePad

« I Question This Headline | Main | Guess The Note »

February 27, 2007



Nifong-ed again.


It appears he may not have even shared this information w/ his investigators.


This does explain why investigators noticed she had trouble sitting and walking.


The news that there are more "missing" DNA results highlights another puzzle in this case: With so much DNA floating around how come the State lab couldn't find any or did they? I believe that there are folks in that lab who know exactly what Nifong was up to from day 1. I strongly suspect that he went to another lab not for better techniques but greater pliability.
I would be interested if anyone has seen anything on this.


I did not need to know that.


It may be that the LAX team was the only group of men in Durham who did not have sexual relations w/ that woman.


"DNA Security discovered the DNA of at least two males in the accuser’s rectum that did not match the Defendants"

Way too much information!!
I'm with Clarice... the LAX men might be the ONLY ones who didn't have something to do with that woman.
Why do these Nifong types always think they can make their reputation and advance it by trying to ruin innocent people?


Giggidy giggidy.

Nick Kasoff - The Thug Report

Hasn't done it with anyone in a week, but has DNA from two men in her back end. Either this woman has horrible personal hygiene, or she is using the same narrow definition of sex that a recent President did. Yep, it depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.

Nick Kasoff
The Thug Report


Perhaps she was constipated.


For a week or more.


Speaking of stuff up the yazoo, I'm watching Chris Matthews interview Sy Hersh.

What's being done to the viewers of MSNBC must be a crime somewhere.


First of all, it’s not all that great to be Durham’s DA. Nevertheless, Nifong took the standard southern ol’ boy route: he used a black woman.

There was no point in this at which he had the slightest doubt that those LAX defendants would be convicted. At the beginning of this he knew that he could keep up the pretense of “rape” long enough to fool the black population of Durham and win an election.

It was clever but it began to go, shall we say, south, because the defendants would not play along. In his scheme, after the election and a decent interval, the accuser’s story would dissolve, as it did, and then he could dismiss the 3 hostages. They would be exonerated and the escort, whose record he knew, would be discarded and humiliated. That’s what kindly souls do to vulnerable black girls. She couldn’t sue him, in that scenario and neither could the boys. Moreover, the boys couldn’t sue the girl because she had no money. It was perfect.

So, if he had been a man who protected Durham’s black population, he would never have permitted this woman to be humiliated and debased by his shameful and illegal conduct. In the end, to rely on someone else’s phrase, her name will become “a hiss and a byword.” Already we know more about her sexual history than anyone cares to know. I feel confident in calling him a racist of the same stripe that held his office in the 40’s and 50’s.

Let’s see if the others there are prepared to take this sacrificial lamb and speak platitudes about the advancement of race relations in the Bull City.


Okay...going for my fourth reading MarkO.


While it pains me to say it, I don't think we can lay all of the mess at Nifong's door. A majority of it, yes. All of it, I don't think so. There are plenty of black hats to go around.

It all kicked off with the dancer trying to game the system and keep from getting committed. The word "rape" didn't rear its head until she was nearing admission to the psyche ward. I can't help but believe that she thought absolutely nothing would come of the complaint - she has a record, she's known to the cops, she's about to get locked up and maybe violate her way to jail and lose her kids. The best outcome she can see at that point is going through the exam, telling a half-assed story that has no physical evidence to back it up, maybe score a few pain meds and go home to wait for the cops to call and say "Sorry", but they can't find enough evidence to charge anyone based on the story she told.

Unfortunately for her, the timing created a "perfect" political storm that brought together a DA with less than stellar ethics and re-election prospects, the moonbat leftists in the Duke faculty, the parachuting in poverty pimps, the local NAACP chapter, PC local media types salivating at the notion of taking a few Dukies down a peg or two, compliant [complicit?] police officers, and racial politics at its worst.

The forces unleashed by the 'Fong would be hard for anyone to control. Given his desperation and flexible backbone, they overwhelmed him and any thought of saying "Hey, I tried," and dismissing the charges for lack of evidence went out the window when the state DNA tests came back negative too early to let him indict the players at the grand jury, quietly dismiss the case after the primary because of the negative DNA results and go unopposed into the general election as the "defender of the poor and down-trodden." Then the whole second DNA lab fiasco began, a challenger for the DA post appeared and Nifong saw that he needed to keep the whole thing afloat - somehow - till after the November election.

He had the proper amount of smoke and a sufficient number of mirrors to get there, but the wheels started falling off soon after.

Ralph L.

So MarkO, you're saying, as usual, the poor black woman gets it in the end, from all comers.
At least her name hasn't been released widely, unlike Tawana what's-her-name from the Rev. Sharpton past.



Well done. I think I know your favorite planet.

Ralph L.

Kaz, IIRC, there was a police sgt. who did some irregular things, too, perhaps at Nifong's request.



Sorry. Like everything else I write, it seems really clear to me. I'll have to hire an editor.



I suspect you're thinking of Gottlieb of the miraculous memory who turned three or so pages of handwritten notes into 30+ pages of typewritten report.

Carol Herman


Wasn't the emergency room nurse that night a newbie?

Isn't the "victim" expecting a kidling soon?

Isn't NiFong way over his head?

And, what about the law school at DUKE, what are they offering to make the 88-idiots-they've tenured GO AWAY?

Given how tiny sperm are, it's just amazing they carry business cards with them. SO the owners can be identified not just up the vagina, but inside the rectum.

Are there no excuses they were lost? And, walked into the rear compartment?


Nah..I'm just hung up on the racist conclusion. Could be because I am from the South and that brush gets a little broad for me.

Ralph L.

Not surprisingly, the most anti-black things I've heard in the last 10 years were spoken by white liberal Democrats.



I meant no general racism. I meant only the foreseeable outcome of this case and what I think Nifong planned.

I hate ot admit it, but there is considerable residual racism in Durham.

Gary Maxwell

Seems like Durham needs to dismiss the charges against these boys forthwith with sincerest apologies and call OJ and ask if while he is on the eternal search for his former wife's killer, could he keep an eye out for the rapists who left their calling card with this young girl. Shouldnt there be an immediate search for the true rapists? Yeah I know.

Ralph L.

MarkO, do you mean the planet beyond Neptune? Not yours, but mine.

Gary Maxwell

BTW if you listen closely you will hear the faint but distinct sound of the cash register ringing. This is more than the straw the broke the camel, it is now obvious that exculpatory evidence was withheld from the Defense when the Prosecutor had it. A clear violation of NC law. Nifong should go to jail.


do you mean the planet beyond Neptune?

There aren't any planets beyond Neptune. Not for a few light-years, anyway.


You're in the area.

Ralph L.

I seem to be having a senior moment at 46.


Go with Pluto.


Whomever - I disagree w/ the other person on this case but I think your personal comment is very harsh and regrettable.

[I agree with Clarice, but this is now mighty cryptic since I struck the preceding comment; we are moving on.]

Ralph L.

Clarice, you are too kind.
MarkO, I am usually reality-based, so I prefer Earth. Pluto?

Bruce Hayden

Of course, if you define "sex" as vaginal intercourse, then maybe the woman hadn't had "sex", as at least this sperm was found in her rectum instead. Sound familiar? If so, it could be because the last person who overdefined the word is also a Democatic politician.


I just want to state categorically that I did not have sex with that woman either the week before or the week after the incident.

....uuummm, how long will the dna stay in the rectum? Does anyone know?

Also by the way, Anna Nicole's baby is not mine unless she used the sperm sample I sent her in a vial much as that incarcerated criminal has claimed.

... uummmm, you think she might have?


First of all remember you are getting this from a DEFENSE motion and a defense blog - nuff said. Second of all, the article plays fast and loose with "reference sample". What does that mean exactly and does the term "reference sample" just mean the accused or could it also mean her boyfriend whom she admitted to having sex with. Then I believe the time period was not for a week, it was 48 hours that she was supposed to tell whom she had sex with from the beginning. Police don't usually ask for a week anymore because it's not relevant, it's nobody's business and because people like JOM blogers will go "AH HAH! WHORE!" if multiple men are mentioned and unfairly prejudice the case. I don't know how long sperm lasts anally, but it's possible it could be from outside the claimed time period.

And really, what difference does it make WHOM she had sex with before the incident. If she wanted to plot something, she could just use an object to get some injuries. She wouldn't have to seek out some stranger to have rough sex with her first, so this whole idea of gotcha with the sex partners, unless it shows any remote relevance to the case, is just stupid. Obviously the girl was no angel, she was a stripper for gosh sakes. Or as one of the players so aptly proclaimed, "She's just a stripper." But even a stripper can get assaulted. In fact, I would venture that strippers are probably even more likely to get assaulted.


To put this in terms that JOM readers can relate to - what if the only information you heard about the Libby case was released by Fitz and written on a blog by Neil Lewis of the NYT. Do you think you'd get the full story there ?- enough so that you could make up your mind without hearing the other side? Try to think about it that way.


Sylvia - Why don't you try again. She had TWO male DNA specimens in her rectum. That would not indicate she had anal intercourse with just her boyfriend.

So she LIED when she said she did not have sex with anyone prior to being allegedly raped.

If she had a bowel movement during the previous week or 48 hours or even 12 hours, she would have vacated the DNA specimens with the feces. So unless she hadn't taken a s--t in a very long while, the DNA specimens in her anus were probably very recent to the time she was swabbed for the DNA in her anus.

So she had been recently ejaculated in her anus by 2 different men, neither of which were at the party where she claims she was raped. And if neither speciemen was her boyfriend, then she had anal sex with 2 men after her last s--t and prior to her ass being swabbed for DNA.

Are you insinuating that the defense has lied to the court in their motion? Just because it was reported in a defense motion on a defense blog does not make it untrue.


I don't know whether I should be relieved or not.

Did they find white boy dna, or black boy dna, or some other type (Indian, Mongolian, Oriental, ...) boy dna?

Or all of the above?

Can they tell?

Will they tell?


Okay Enlightened I agree that it is relevant if it can be shown that she lied about the men she had sex with during the time frame she was asked about. I still don't believe the time frame was a week, like I've seen talked about, but was less. I agree with your logic that the sperm sample must be recent, however I need to see that quoted by a medical source before I officially believe that sperm does not usually last anally for more than 48 hours. However if it can be shown that the sperm was very recent, I agree that that could be relevant if it showed she blatantly lied.

Or... are we very sure that there was not a guest there at the party who was not a LAX member and who had not been reported by anyone? Just asking... have to eliminate all possibilities first. I think the racial profiling for the DNA is not a bad idea as it could shed light.


At this point in the Duke LAX proceedings, anyone who defends the prosecution of this case, or hides behind the “need for a trial” smokescreen is intellectually dishonest. I would love to debate the merits of the case, but, by definition, my opponent would be irrational.

Annoying Old Guy


The real point is actually close to the one made here against Fitzgerald — these results were known before any of the Duke students were indicted. Why, then, if the DA and the police believed a crime occurred, weren't they trying to find the people to match the DNA? It seems almost beyond argument that the purpose was to indict members of a specific group (Bush Administration, Duke lacrosse players), not to discover what actually happened or pursue actual criminals.

I don't think it's that relevant to whether the accuser lied, but very relevant with regard to police and prosecutorial misconduct, because either explanation (covering for a lying accuser or ignoring real perpetrators) looks bad for them and puts paid to the ongoing case.


The next obvious question is whether the dna is connected to Al Sharpton or even a white relative of his?

That would be a major media event especially if we can establish cupability back 10 generation or so.

Gary Maxwell

Hey my own genealogical research shows my own ancestors not only owned no slaves ( or much else either) but were at best tenant farmers or sharecroppers, or perhaps even indentured servants. Does that mean I will be exempt from any reparations tax? Seems fair, no land ownership meant they could not vote so direct or indirect responsibility for slavery. Hey maybe with an indentured servant claim I too can get in on the gravy train?


GM, I believe half the people in the US or more have no ancestors who were even here until after the Civil War and many of them lived in roughly comparable circumstances to slavery in their home countries.

Gary Maxwell

My mind twists. So does a person of mixed heritage, both pay reparations and receive them too? what about people of color who came from descendants from Britain or british protectorates ( ie Bahamas ) or Dutch ancestory and Dutch Protectorates or anyone whose ancestors voluntarily came to US as opposed to in the hold of a slave ship?

I know for a fact that records back into the 1600s and 1700s are scarce and not very detailed. Its even worse for slave records. How do you prove your Inclusion? Or will this be a presumption based on skin color unless the government can absolutely rule your inclusion in the class out?

Seems to me the whole concept needs a lot of work.


I read an interesting article some years back on the Irish contract workers in the pre-civil war era. It contrasted the treatment of these “temps” of their time to slaves.

As you would assume, the controlling factions treated the rentals with much less care than the property they owned. Using comparable values, the article highlighted the costs associated with slave purchase and maintenance, which underscored the logic of using the Irish for the most dangerous and debilitating jobs.

Looks like if reparations are ever seriously considered, the Kennedy’s may have a claim.


IIRC, Brown v. The Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas was a case brought in equity. The relief requested was injunctive, hence the order for bussing.

Equitable relief was granted on the basis that money damages were either impossible or exceedingly difficult to measure.

I wonder how that decision will factor into any lawsuit about reparations. Perhaps that is the reason these discussions are legislative. Nevertheless, in some theory, the injunctive relief was all that was required.

Gary Maxwell

Board was decided in 1954, busing to achieve diversity was a decidedly 60s creation of the courts. The subsequent decisions may have cited Brown but Brown did not lead to busing as a remedy directly.


I guess the question now is who allegedly had more men's DNA inside her, the Duke "rape" case accuser or Anna Nicole Smith and her 37 "baby-daddies"?



You are correct that the first Brown was decided in 1954, but in that decision the Court wrote:

“Because these are class actions, because of the wide applicability of this decision, and because of the great variety of local conditions, the formulation of decrees in these cases presents problems of considerable complexity. On reargument, the consideration of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the primary question -- the constitutionality of segregation in public education”

In Brown II, decided in 1955 the Court’s opinion included this phrase:

“In fashioning and effectuating the decrees, the courts will be guided by equitable principles. Traditionally, equity has been characterized by a practical flexibility in shaping its remedies and by a facility for adjusting and reconciling public and private needs. These cases call for the exercise of these traditional attributes of equity power. At stake is the personal interest of the plaintiffs in admission to public schools as soon as practicable on a nondiscriminatory basis.”

It also included these mysterious words: “with all deliberate speed . . .”



I think you have hit the nail on the head.

I see the possiblity of a quiz show, or at least one of those bean jar contests.

You know where everyone guesses the number of beans in the jar at the register, and the winner gets a free meal, or a basket of something.

The comments to this entry are closed.