share.triangle.com - Duke lacrosse case - Comments

Duke Lacrosse Case

Visitor — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 20:23:55 -0400

Crystal Mangum may be a liar, who really knows! But comments that state all blacks and other races are all liars too are racesist . Let's not forget the many times blacks and others have been lynched because of the color of their skins and the many times in America whites have committed crimes and used us as scape goats for murdering your own kids. After all, I wonder who we learned it from and where we learned it at. The best liars are the ones that stole America from the natives and still believe they own it. Who is selling it off? Certainly not those of us that are trying to live the American dream that whites thinks is only theirs. Maybe the history of whites being the best rapist has spread. After all they have proed through history they know how. Get used to it! I don't think so! Maybe they should get used to a taste of their own medicine.

Why won't newspapers ask hard questions??

MikeKell — Fri, 11 May 2007 22:27:26 -0400

This article about the DPD report is itself an embarrassment. Do you folks at the N&O not realize how gullible you must look for publishing this witout questioning it in any way? Why isn't anything said about the lies told to get the original search warrant and NTO? Why aren't any of the false accuser's inconsistencies discussed as to why the DPD failed to ask her about these? Why isn't there any information about the officer's accompanying the DA to the DNA lab, or why they didn't say anythign when they KNEW he lied in open court about what was said in those meetings?

This is one of those days it is hard to be a Durham resident. I am embarrassed that Patrick Baker spent 5 pages defending the undefensible, his own flawed involvement and mistakes in directing the police. I am embarrassed that nothing was said about the police chief's disappearance for most of this case, and his false statements about the strength of the evidence he claimed would be presented. I am embarrassed that the local media are so, well, local.

Maybe the DPD and the H-S and the N&O are doing the best that they can, bless their hearts.

Mike

Si non è vero è ben trovato

2004 law for prosecutors

Ewol_Smith — Fri, 04 May 2007 09:08:19 -0400

Oh, sure, now that we've thrown out the baby's bath water, let's throw out the baby, too. The problem, Sir Prosecutors, is you can't all demonstrate good judgment and integrity, so you need some oversight from the people you 'serve.' Repealing laws that help us oversee you will just allow more leeway in charging innocent people. Aren't you guys lawyers? You should be able to see that.

Hmmmm ...

judyso — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 22:54:59 -0400

Interesting post unreconstructed. So where is the public outcry for all the "wrongfully convicted" in Durham County for the past 30 years that Nifong and all the other Assistant District Attorneys have been putting innocent people in jail and on Death Row?

Hard to imagine citizens like yourself with so much knowledge about this outrageous long-term corruption in Durham County have sat quietly by all these years allowing so many innocent people to suffer prison or worse while you and yours did and said nothing.

“Why did these guys so desparately want to avoid a trial?”

unreconstructed1 — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:49:36 -0400

Have you ever been to Durham ? Have you ever been to court in Durham ?

If you've ever been to court in Durham , or really just been to Durham at all , you'll know that a white defendant ain't got a snowball's chance against a black accuser in a Durham court room with a Durham jury .

If these guys went to trial there , even with full video and 200 police officers as witnesses on their side , they may have been convicted against overwhealming evidence that they were innocent .

The fact that this crooked DA indicted them with the lack of evidence produced , shows an extreme bias on the part of the Durham DA's office . Had it not been for the national media attention , I believe they would have undoubtedly been wrongly convicted . The media was there to see these rich white spoiled brats convicted , but it backfired on them didn't it !

Mike is lying or he's not.... Makes no difference.

powertec — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:33:30 -0400

It seems to me that Mike is lying about his reasons for doing the many seemingly stupid things that got him to where he is now. But let's just choose to believe him when he says that he didn't mean to hide DNA evidence, etc., etc. All that means is that instead of being a crooked, rogue prosecutor who tried to send three innocent guys to prison, he is just incompetent. Either way, he should be disbarred and forced to resign. Then let the criminal courts give him the due process he doesn't give others.

Mike is lying or he's not.... Makes no difference.

powertec — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:33:30 -0400

Gotcha...

mutex — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 02:06:14 -0400

For all those people who only come to these forums to play 'gotcha' please leave me out of it. If typos make my questions 'invalid' to you then please ignore my posts. I know the difference between 'then' and 'than' and 'there', 'they're' and 'their' but I make mistakes.

My reasoning can be 'faulty' but just saying so convinces me of nothing.

I sometimes use sarcasm or nuance in my posts when I know I shouldn't. I'm working on becoming a better person but obviously its a work in progress.

I have NO agenda other than the truth. I am not trying to convince you of anything. My goal is simply to learn but for some reason people seem to think I come here (and to other forums) to be insulted.

I wouldn't be posting here or asking questions if I hadn't already done quite a bit of reading on the subject.

I find discussing virtually anything in these forums to be very difficult because of misunderstandings and downright intellectually dishonest people. What does it mean when someone states they wanted to avoid trial because 'there was no evidence'? This implies that if there was evidence they would want a trial.

On one hand people say my questions are 'outrageous', that I have an 'abysmal lack of knowledge about this case' and question my 'reasoning' on the other hand they state Nifong's behavior was 'virtually inexplicable' and the courts will have to decide if he is mentally ill and that he 'hadn’t a clue' what he would do if this case went to trial despite having a 'reputation as a sharp lawyer'. Still they say they can't understand my confusion.

I hope we can all agree that we want corrupt politicians punished, innocent people to go free and people guilty of sexual assault against ANYONE to face justice. If this is true I don't see the reason for personal attacks.

Thanks for the encouragement

mutex — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:45:15 -0400

You are right when you say I will have to wait a long time for an intelligent answer to any of my questions in these forums and I am trying to keep 'hanging in there'...but its difficult.

This Attorney General Cooper sounds like an amazing man. I never met, or even heard of anyone, that had the power to pronounce you innocent. I thought that was pretty much something only God was suppose to be able to do. So I learned something.

If Nifong is guilty I hope they lock him up and throw away the key. If these guys are actually innocent then I'm glad they weren't railroaded. However, they will NEVER be heros to me and I wish there would have been a trial (after a year and millions of dollars of publicity) because having one politician proclaim their innocence after another politician proclaimed them guilty hardly seems a distinction worth making.

Throughout history the rich and powerful have always had advantages over the poor and disenfranchised in this country, and around the world, but is it too much to ask that we not applaud this injustice too loudly?

I am begging for your help!

mutex — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:24:59 -0400

Listen, I will state catagorically for the record that you are infinitely more intelligent then me and probably an all-around better person.

That being said, I honestly don't believe you answered even one of my questions.

I don't know if any of these guys is innocent or guilty of any crime but I do know a lot of things don't make sense to me...probably because of my ignorance.

If your goal here is to win an argument then okay, you win. I would like to understand the truth and don't mind 'losing' to do so.

I have seen nothing so far that makes me believe that Nifong wouldn't have won the election for DA of Durham County even if he never would have brought these charges. I've read about Freda Black and I believe the only reason she ever had a chance was precisely because of all the negative publicity surrounding the charges. Do you have exit polling showing that Nifong won because of this case? Also, even if this was the only way Nifong thought he could win it still sounds like an insane 'plan' with a huge down side with the only up side being a small increase in his pension??? Are attorneys that bad off in North Carolina?

Next, I don't know about you but if I got charged with rape I would HAVE to go home and wait for the trial because I don't have millions to spend on public relations. In general, I don't understand why anyone decides to try their case in the media...but remember I'm stupid. What WAS all that money spent on btw?

I know your mind is made up and that you have a direct line to God so of course you know the truth, but I don't. I suppose I should just trust you and take all your statements and opinions as fact but something just won't let me.

I bet there are poor people charged with rape and other crimes in this country every day. Some of these people are probably charged and probably even convicted by over-zealous and even corrupt DAs. Nobody seems to care about these people but somehow people who have every privilege this nation has to offer cause the masses to rise up in unison to support them. I truly don't get it.

I know I'm never going to convince anyone in these type forums of anything they don't already believe. I may be stupid but I'm not naive. My problem is that I keep hoping someone out there can convince me that things like this make sense. So far all I find are people who want to win. Like the truth is some kind of contest.

Nothing Nifong did makes sense to me. Nothing the accused families did makes sense to me. While I understand talk show hosts and pundits of all stripes are only interested in their own ratings and exposure and have little or no use for the truth I don't understand why people are so easily fooled by them.

If your mind is so made up that you can't understand my confusion then maybe you aren't the right person to help me but I have yet to see one newspaper story, one news show, one talk show or even a blog where ANY of the questions I've asked was raised let alone answered.

If what people allege is true that necessarily means that both our legal system and our political system are broken way beyond anything getting rid of Mike Nifong can repair. While this could very well be true it still doesn't make me worry for the rich and powerful. It does make me very worried for the rest of us!

mutex ...

marbar44 — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 22:07:34 -0400

You wrote, “Mike is either a total idiot or he is mentally ill...nothing else makes any sense.”

To you, perhaps…. But there is a third option: Mike Nifong is an arrogant, dishonest opportunist, who chose the wrong “horse” to ride to an election victory. (The “horse”, mutex, is the “case” brought by Crystal Gail Mangus, in case you’re confused…)

You wrote, “Why did these guys so desparately want to avoid a trial?”

Perhaps because they were innocent and there was NO EVIDENCE against them – only the constantly-changing allegations of their accuser! No evidence, no corroboration of the “victim’s” story, faulty identifications of the accused and plenty of evidence that at least one of the men was elsewhere when the alleged attack occurred. Why on earth would they want to go to trial when the best that they could have expected at the conclusion was a “not guilty” verdict – which is not the same as being declared “innocent” (which they finally were, thanks to Attorney General Cooper!).

You wrote, “It it would have been me I would have demanded a trial so that I could exonerate myself and to show all the world what a total fool Nifong supposedly is.”

a) I doubt that “demanding” anything of Nifong would have provided you any satisfaction; he refused to even listen to the attorneys who had proof that Crystal’s accusations did not conform to the evidence; b) the upcoming legal case(s) against Nifong may show him to be not only a fool, but a criminal as well; and c) if you are ever in a situation such as these young men were, PLEASE post it here on the forum so we can all see how well you do exonerating yourself!

You wrote, “Something doesn't smell right here …”

Could it be your reasoning?

You also wrote, “until someone provides an intelligent answer to why so many people behaved so strangely …”

You might have a very long wait for an intelligent answer as to why people behave the way they do – because there often isn’t one. Behavior that is driven by greed, arrogance, deception, vindictiveness, et al, is not intelligent, but it is always human, usually self-serving and often criminal.

But, hey, you hang in there …..

Outrageous!

marbar44 — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:54:14 -0400

To mutex, (in response to your "cut and dried?" comment submitted on April 16, 2007 at 9:53 pm):

The only thing that makes me go “hmmmmmm” is your abysmal lack of knowledge about this case. If you were to take the time to read at least a portion of the publicity about this case as to how and why things proceeded as they did, you would probably find most of the answers you seek. I’ll use quotes from some of the N&O articles to enlighten you, in (mostly) the order that you raised the questions.

You wrote, “Each family of the accused Duke Lacrosse players spent over a million dollars on legal and public relations fees.” and “Since there was no evidence (which they had to know BECAUSE they are innocent) what would have happened if they had just went home and waited for their trial?”

Are you serious?!?!? If someone accused you of this most egregious crime and you were innocent, are you saying that you would simply go home, sit down and wait to (possibly) be cleared? (Of course, no one ever goes to prison although innocent!) These young men had been pilloried in the press, suspended from Duke University, disparaged by a bunch of pot-bangers and others who had judged them to be guilty from the beginning – without ANY evidence. And you imply that they should not have defended themselves with at least as much vigor as was used to attack them?!? Furthermore, the decision as to when to proceed to trial is not that of the defendants nor their attorneys; it is the decision of the state. With Nifong in charge of that decision, who knows when – or if – they would ever have come to trial? Meanwhile, you suggest that they should sit, put their lives on hold, and wait!

You wrote, “How did having the parents, their lawyers, and public relations people causing the story to be broadcast non-stop across the country (and even world) help to minimize the damage to their reputations of being accused of rape?”

“As he fought to win the Democratic nomination for district attorney, he made a series of decisions and inflammatory statements that propelled the case into an international scandal.” It was Nifong’s outrageous, self-serving behavior that made this an international news story! These innocent men had every right to defend themselves and their reputations against his unfounded and defamatory allegations in the same venue.

You wrote, “If spending all this money is necessary to obtain justice in our legal system what are the other 99% of us, who don't have millions (and connections with the producers of 60 Minutes), suppose to do?” and “Pray this never happens to you because if you really believe this is the state of our criminal justice system you won't stand a chance!”

As a result of this case and the publicity it has garnered, perhaps the possibility of that occurring again has lessened. If not, then you should hope that no one ever sees in you an opportunity to catapult himself/herself into national prominence for personal gain. And, if they do, then pray…!

You wrote, “(W)ould someone PLEASE walk me through Nifong's supposed plan here!!!!” and “First, since incumbent Democrats almost always win reelection in Durham County his chances, barring some unforseen catastrophe, would seem to have been pretty good even without bringing the charges.”

The key word here is reelection! Mike Nifong had never been elected to the position of District Attorney; he had been appointed. “In March of last year, few people outside the Durham courthouse had heard of Mike Nifong.” “In April 2005, Nifong had been appointed by Gov. Mike Easley to fill Jim Hardin's unexpired term. Easley has said Nifong promised not to run for election. But he did, and he had strong opposition from former Assistant District Attorney Freda Black in the May primary.” In order to get elected, Nifong had to make himself known among the mostly-black constituency. He chose this very volatile case as his vehicle to do so. “As he fought to win the Democratic nomination for district attorney, he made a series of decisions and inflammatory statements that propelled the case into an international scandal.” In his words to his former campaign manager, “'I'm getting a million dollars of free advertisements.” “It was clear to me and a lot of other people that [Nifong] used this case to win the election. The sad thing about it is that it worked. I found that to be very discouraging about the political process. ... He had no name recognition before this case. I don't think anybody outside the courthouse knew who he was.” (Freda Black)

Why would he want the D.A. position permanently? Among perhaps other reasons, “Four more years would make a big difference for Nifong's retirement. If he served five years as a district attorney, his 29 years as a regular state employee would apply to the more lucrative retirement plan for a district attorney; overnight, in April 2010, his annual pension would increase by at least $15,000 a year.” He had something to gain personally. But in order to serve those next four years as a D.A., he had to get himself elected.

You wrote, “Then once he had won, he dropped the rape charge but not the other charges. Why? He had achieved his supposed goal.”

He dropped the rape charges only because he had no alternative under state law. “The woman said in the interview that she was no longer certain the players had vaginally assaulted her with their penises -- North Carolina's legal definition of rape. That prompted Nifong to drop the rape charges.” He apparently had no intention of ever dropping any of the charges.

You wrote, “Next, if the case had gone to trial what was Nifong planning to do? Stand up in open court and make a fool of himself before the world...cause remember there is NO evidence.”

You would have to ask Mike Nifong what he was planning to do. My guess is that he hadn’t a clue, given how this case had mushroomed into international prominence, provided him with the means to win an election, and then totally collapsed from a legal standpoint. But you are right in that there was and is NO evidence! NOT. ONE. SINGLE. SHRED. Only the word of a single accuser, without any corroboration, whose story changed more than a dozen times over the course of this fiasco – and more than six times before Nifong even chose to press charges, against the advice of several of the investigators.

You wrote, “Why has no one in the mainstream media raised these questions?”

Have you been living on another planet? One that has absolutely no media coverage?? From day one, this case has been hotly debated and expounded upon – in every venue available.

You wrote, “Is he mentally ill?”

That will be for the courts to decide when he faces charges for his unethical and virtually inexplicable behavior throughout this whole process. He has been described in this way, “Nifong had a reputation as a sharp lawyer but was also known as abrasive, vindictive and prone to volcanic tantrums.” His refusal to even listen to, much less investigate, evidence contradicting his claims would support a claim of supreme arrogance as well.

You wrote, “Why is everyone so concerned about the rich?”

I think that almost “everyone” is concerned about justice for the innocent, regardless of their wealth. (Google “Andrew Luster” for a story about a wealthy man who was convicted of rape. Of course, there was evidence …)

You said, “So...this is the brain trust I need to convince to get the case reopened huh?”

Good luck with that!

And finally, mutex, regarding your written statement, “notice I didn't say 'black stripper' because she's a human being”: that is a reflection of your own judgment! This woman, Crystal Gayle Mangum, is black; she has worked as a stripper. Both of those statements are true. However, they do not assert nor imply that she is therefore less than a human being. Those are YOUR words. Hmmmmmm.

Note: everything in quotation marks has been taken directly from mutex's comment on 4/16/07 or from various articles in the N&O that have been printed on their website.

That is the point. Mike is

mutex — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:02:09 -0400

That is the point. Mike is either a total idiot or he is mentally ill...nothing else makes any sense.

Why did these guys so desparately want to avoid a trial?

It it would have been me I would have demanded a trial so that I could exonerate myself and to show all the world what a total fool Nifong supposedly is. I would have saved my million dollars and said to Mr. Nifong "show the world how you prosecute a case with NO evidence'!

Something doesn't smell right here and I don't care if every talk show host in the country tells me these guys are innocent (and heros) until someone provides an intelligent answer to why so many people behaved so strangely I say this is anylthing but 'cut and dried'!

Mike would have been a joke in court with this case

powertec — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:48:20 -0400

While it's true that these 3 guys had excellent legal counsel and having to go to trial would not have been fair to them, it would have been interesting to see Mike try to present a case with no evidence. Assuming they could have seated an impartial jury in Durham which could have been a problem, I think Mike would have been totally embarrased by even a public defender. What did Mike have? A compaining "victim" with a long history of problems who changed her story many times including the descriptions of the 3 or 4 assailants. The other dancer refutted her story. The cell phone, ATM, dorm room access key records all contradicted her story. No DNA evidence, etc. etc. etc. I would love to have seen Mike squirm through a trial.

Cut and dried?

mutex — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:53:39 -0400

So...this is the brain trust I need to convince to get the case reopened huh?

Well, I probably can't convince anyone but here are some things that should make you go hmmmmmm.

Each family of the accused Duke Lacrosse players spent over a million dollars on legal and public relations fees. What did they get for their money? Since there was no evidence (which they had to know BECAUSE they are innocent) what would have happened if they had just went home and waited for their trial? How did having the parents, their lawyers, and public relations people causing the story to be broadcast non-stop across the country (and even world) help to minimize the damage to their reputations of being accused of rape? If spending all this money is necessary to obtain justice in our legal system what are the other 99% of us, who don't have millions (and connections with the producers of 60 Minutes), suppose to do? Why doesn't anyone apparently care about this issue?

Next, would someone PLEASE walk me through Nifong's supposed plan here!!!! Let me see if I understand what's being suggested. He decided to risk his career, his law license, his reputation, his life savings and possibly even his freedom to charge three white guys from wealthy, well-connected families with a crime he knew they didn't commit to increase his chance of being re-elected DA in Durham County? Okay, so let's examine the premise. First, since incumbent Democrats almost always win reelection in Durham County his chances, barring some unforseen catastrophe, would seem to have been pretty good even without bringing the charges. After the charge were files there was a hailstorm of negative publicity brought about by the families (remember the million dollars plus per family) inspite of which Nifong still won reelection. Then once he had won, he dropped the rape charge but not the other charges. Why? He had achieved his supposed goal. All he had to say was further investigation showed that there wasn't enough evidence to win the case even though he still believed the woman's story...or some such.

Next, if the case had gone to trial what was Nifong planning to do? Stand up in open court and make a fool of himself before the world...cause remember there is NO evidence.

Why has no one in the mainstream media raised these questions? Does Nifong have a history of charging people he knows are innocent? Did he have some sort of vendetta for these guys or their families? Is he mentally ill...because otherwise none of this makes any sense!

Lastly, if our legal system is this screwed up where totally innocent people can be charged by an insane DA, indicted by a clueless Grand Jury, and sent to trial by a presiding judge who apparently wouldn't know probable cause if it bit him in the butt and the only way to save yourself is to spend millions of dollars then God help the rest of us!!! Why is everyone so concerned about the rich? Pray this never happens to you because if you really believe this is the state of our criminal justice system you won't stand a chance!

On the other hand...what if this woman (notice I didn't say 'black stripper' because she's a human being) was sexually assaulted? Does anyone care? I suppose not. After all she's only a black stripper. Maybe that's waht all the money bought. Hmmmmmmm.

Duke lacrosse case

administrator — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 12:37:47 -0500

Share your thoughts on the Duke lacrosse case.