Duke Lacrosse Rape Allegation

[jackie hayes]

As for "proof" I only have my experience working with my college administration and students (as well as occassionally the police). I saw rapists admit they had done it, and not be kicked out of school--the only ramification was picking dorms and classes after the victim. I had one student get her complaint not heard because she was drunk at the time. So, I have no proof, but after working on it for four years (and visiting and doing training at other schools in the region, I can't say I found any different attitudes elsewhere).

If multiple students admitted, 'Yes, I raped her', and did not get prosecuted (forget about kicked out of school) -- I would think you'd have the makings of one hell of a political scandal that at the very least gets the police sup canned.

[Soxy]

That's not how I take "culture of rape", but okay.  I don't deny that there are groups (not small ones) that think that way.

 

The existence of apologists, and their tendency to associate, doesn't make a culture, imo.  By that logic, we have in every single place a culture of anything.  A culture of white-on-black murder, of black-on-white murder, anything.

 

It's a little ironic to say a culture of rape exists because some people make bad assumptions about other groups, in defending a statement that assumed that the white athletes must certainly be guilty, since (those) people make bad assumptions about other groups.  Those people, some people, but certainly not our dear, truthful Alvaro.

I was only defending the existence of a rape culture. Because I do, truly, believe it exists. I'm not saying white athletes did it or are more likely. I am nto saying athletes period are more likely to do it. I think it is a "cultural" because it has the implicit support of the administration which should fully investigate each report, but often don't or do so differentially on circumstances.

[Soxy]

If multiple students admitted, 'Yes, I raped her', and did not get prosecuted (forget about kicked out of school) -- I would think you'd have the makings of one hell of a political scandal that at the very least gets the police sup canned.

They were dating. And the police claimed no jury in the world would convict because they had sex before then. No physical evidence, and the accused claimed he that despite her saying no, he figured it would be okay because they'd done it before.

 

And police/college reporting is often separate. You can go to one without going to the other. So you could get kicke dout of school and never have a criminal record even if the academic institution found you "responsible."

Edited April 19, 2006 by Soxy

[jackie hayes]

I was only defending the existence of a rape culture. Because I do, truly, believe it exists. I'm not saying white athletes did it or are more likely. I am nto saying athletes period are more likely to do it. I think it is a "cultural" because it has the implicit support of the administration which should fully investigate each report, but often don't or do so differentially on circumstances.

If "circumstances"="evidence", then I don't think that's reasonable. It can only be fully investigated if there's something there to look at. But that's not to deny that there can be bad administrations. Still, there's no reason the administration should be able to block any part of a police investigation.

[Soxy]

If "circumstances"="evidence", then I don't think that's reasonable.  It can only be fully investigated if there's something there to look at.  But that's not to deny that there can be bad administrations.  Still, there's no reason the administration should be able to block any part of a police investigation.

The college can (and often does) offer to handle the investigation internally to avoid bad press *cough* I mean, save the victim the trouble of going to the police.

 

As for the rest, agree to disagree.

[jackie hayes]

They were dating. And the police claimed no jury in the world would convict because they had sex before then. No physical evidence, and the accused claimed he that despite her saying no, he figured it would be okay because they'd done it before.

 

And police/college reporting is often separate. You can go to one without going to the other. So you could get kicke dout of school and never have a criminal record even if the academic institution found you "responsible."

So college-student privilege is at the same or higher level as doctor-patient privilege? If so, okay.

[Soxy]

So college-student privilege is at the same or higher level as doctor-patient privilege?  If so, okay.

That is the way that my college did it, separate reporting systems. They have to turn in the numbers of reported rapes/sexual assults to the government, but they do not have to file a police report. The government does compile crime stats for each school, but just because you see a school had X numbers of rapes reported does NOT mean that all of those were also reported to the police.

[Soxbadger]

Whitesoxfan,

 

I disagree.

 

The number 1 thing for District Attorney is percentage of convictions. If you want to move up from a states attorney to federal or flip to the defense, the first thing that your future employer will look at is "What percentage of cases did you win." A good prosecutor is up over the 90% range, because they do not bring to trial cases that they feel they are going to lose. On the other hand a good defense attorney is aiming for 50% win rate, as you are always playing behind the 8 ball, even with the burden of proof being so high for the govt.

 

The entire argument of yours is based on him winning the case. If he gets a conviction, then yes this will increase his chances at re-election. But if he loses, you will undoubtedly get a candidate to run against him on the platform that he botched this case.

 

I doubt I will convince you though, seems that you are basing your entire argument on your own opinion.

 

But any DA, or other lawyer who has knowledge on prosecutors will tell you, high profile cases with marginal evidence are a great way to lose an election, not win one.

[jackie hayes]

Whitesoxfan,

 

I disagree.

 

The number 1 thing for District Attorney is percentage of convictions. If you want to move up from a states attorney to federal or flip to the defense, the first thing that your future employer will look at is "What percentage of cases did you win." A good prosecutor is up over the 90% range, because they do not bring to trial cases that they feel they are going to lose. On the other hand a good defense attorney is aiming for 50% win rate, as you are always playing behind the 8 ball, even with the burden of proof being so high for the govt.

 

The entire argument of yours is based on him winning the case. If he gets a conviction, then yes this will increase his chances at re-election. But if he loses, you will undoubtedly get a candidate to run against him on the platform that he botched this case.

 

I doubt I will convince you though, seems that you are basing your entire argument on your own opinion.

 

But any DA, or other lawyer who has knowledge on prosecutors will tell you, high profile cases with marginal evidence are a great way to lose an election, not win one.

He's not being hired, he's being elected. So the "employer" isn't asking any of these questions. And the primary election is in 2 weeks. Safe to say there'll be no trial before then.

[Controlled Chaos]

Whitesoxfan,

 

I disagree.

 

The number 1 thing for District Attorney is percentage of convictions. If you want to move up from a states attorney to federal or flip to the defense, the first thing that your future employer will look at is "What percentage of cases did you win." A good prosecutor is up over the 90% range, because they do not bring to trial cases that they feel they are going to lose. On the other hand a good defense attorney is aiming for 50% win rate, as you are always playing behind the 8 ball, even with the burden of proof being so high for the govt.

 

The entire argument of yours is based on him winning the case. If he gets a conviction, then yes this will increase his chances at re-election. But if he loses, you will undoubtedly get a candidate to run against him on the platform that he botched this case.

 

I doubt I will convince you though, seems that you are basing your entire argument on your own opinion.

 

But any DA, or other lawyer who has knowledge on prosecutors will tell you, high profile cases with marginal evidence are a great way to lose an election, not win one.

 

Like I said I don't know the facts on the cas so I can't comment on that, but I do know...if this DA didn't move forward with or without evidence he would be burned at the stake. At least now even if he can say he pursued the case no matter what.

[Soxbadger]

Hes being elected in 2 weeks?

 

So your position is that if that the only reason the DA is charging these people is for the election?

 

Because if that is the case after he is re-elected he will then drop the charges.

 

If you are wrong, after he is re-elected he will continue with the case.

 

I say the latter will happen. I thought that his election was in the normal time period (November or so) so that the trial would be under way.

[mr_genius]

As a former rape counselor on a college campus, I don't have any problem with applying this term to my old school or my current one.

 

 

your school has a culture of rape? which one is that, i'll make sure to tell people to avoid it.

[jackie hayes]

Hes being elected in 2 weeks?

 

So your position is that if that the only reason the DA is charging these people is for the election?

 

Because if that is the case after he is re-elected he will then drop the charges.

 

If you are wrong, after he is re-elected he will continue with the case.

 

I say the latter will happen. I thought that his election was in the normal time period (November or so) so that the trial would be under way.

The Democratic primary is May 2. Not the election, but the primary, and he has 2 challengers for that.

 

I'm not a good message board gun-slinging type, but I think it's a pretty fair suspicion.

 

I think it's a little naive to say that the day after the election he'd drop the case. Yeah, all prosecuters want a good percentage. But this is just one case, with national coverage a million times greater than anything else he'll cover. He won't risk looking like a politician on this one huge case just for the 1/10 of a percent effect it'll have on his overall percentage.

[Soxbadger]

I just think saying this is all for an election is a very big simplification of whats going on.

 

Just looking at the evidence, it would be almost impossible for the DA not to bring charges.

 

1) They have a victim.

 

2) They have an identification.

 

If that was all the evidence they had, at trial the DA probably has a 50% shot at conviction, depending on what goes on. Which ever side had the more compelling witness, is going to be the side that wins. I doubt that the defense attorneys are going to put their clients on the stand, maybe its really hard to tell without the depositions or without personal knowledge.

 

At that point you have the defense calling experts to testify about DNA, and you have the prosecution with a live breathing witness. Most jurors are going to find the impact of the girls testimony to be more compelling. If they believe the girl, conviction. If they think shes lieing, acquittal.

 

Now there is still evidence outstanding. They are going to run more DNA tests, if you get a DNA match, you are almost at 75% conviction. This is because at that point the defense starts to have to "rationalize how the DNA got there." Now the defense has a much more difficult time, if you are not willing to call your client (the defendant) then you have unrebutted testimony that:

 

A) This is the guy who did it.

 

B ) The guys DNA is on her.

 

At that point the only defense really becomes consent, or trying to make up a theory that most jurors wont buy.

 

Looking at this case, I would say that there would have been a much bigger problem if with this evidence the DA did not bring charges.

 

There are more cases that convictions occur because of eye witness testimony than because of DNA evidence. Many murder cases have nothing more than: "I saw this guy shoot X." No gun, no prints, nothing but an eye witness. Hence why the DA has to go forward.

 

But it is very cool to play the race card.

 

I mean if a white girl was the one claiming rape, Im sorry but the charges would have been brought quicker, and the bail would probably have been set higher.

 

(Edit)

 

One last thing, in my opinion the biggest thing about this case is that white people do not want to believe that rich white Duke students would want to rape a poor black stripper.

 

Hell if this was black student athletes and a white stripper, the public would have them guilty before the trial even started.

Edited April 19, 2006 by Soxbadger

[Mplssoxfan]

He's in a highly majority african american voter district, and this case is the black stripper vs. the rich white guys from Duke, no matter how else it may be portrayed.  There is a reason lack of DNA evidence all of a sudden means nothing when it comes to this case.

 

One misconception that needs to be cleared up: Durham County is not majority African-American. There's a high (39%) African-American population, but, it's not "highly majority african american".

 

Link to census data.

[Rex Kickass]

The drudge report is all over this. Saying something along the lines of identifications were made regarding the scratches on the backs of the two indicted players. In the meantime NBC is showing the face of the accuser, which most news organizations do not do.

 

And I'm thinking to myself - how convenient... the Chinese head of state is here and nobody seems to realize that he's holding a journalist with American news organizations in custody for disseminating state secrets for nearly two years. Except there are no actual charges filed for this guy.

 

But finally we have a story replacing that missing whats her name from the Caribbean.

[mr_genius]

And I'm thinking to myself - how convenient... the Chinese head of state is here and nobody seems to realize that he's holding a journalist with American news organizations in custody for disseminating state secrets for nearly two years. Except there are no actual charges filed for this guy.

 

But finally we have a story replacing that missing whats her name from the Caribbean.

 

 

journalistic standards are so low

 

it's a sad state of affairs

[jackie hayes]

One thing I want to throw out here -- I tend to be sceptical when race is thrown out as a motivating issue.  For example, when the whacko from Georgia who thinks she can ignore Capitol security cried racism.  But a few things in this case made it sound likely here.  And the remark about flaying only reinforces that.

 

It's amazing how sick a subculture can become.  It's Lord of the Flies for post-pubes.

 

One last thing, in my opinion the biggest thing about this case is that white people do not want to believe that rich white Duke students would want to rape a poor black stripper.

 

Hell if this was black student athletes and a white stripper, the public would have them guilty before the trial even started.

 

Okay, I'm white, and here's my quote from over a week ago. I was willing to believe the charges, in fact I did believe them, but when the facts change, etc.

 

I think the biggest thing on either side is the race issue. Many blacks in Durham don't like the idea that white athletes at a rich school feel entitled, and many whites don't like the insinuation that they would condone rape as long as it's done to a black girl. There's some vague social truth in each position, but in this particular case, one party is right and one party is wrong. As of now, her case looks weak. So if you want your "biggest thing" to speak for yourself, fine. But leave me the f*** out of it.

[EvilMonkey]

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=4091290

 

Just some comments about the phots that were taken during the party. Take it for what it is worth.

 

Eyewitness News Looks at Party Photos By Steve Daniels

(04/18/06 -- DURHAM) - Eyewitness News and the ABC News law-and-justice unit are getting a chance to examine time-stamped photos taken inside the home on the night of the controversial Duke lacrosse party.

 

The photos are believed to be authentic and taken by one of the students at the March 13 party. The time stamps on the photos appear to be accurate. Pictures of a wristwatch magnified for clarity correspond with the time on the photos. The players are sitting on three couches in a semicircle with the dancers in the middle.

11:02 p.m.: The first picture shows at least 10 students hanging out in a living room, apparently waiting for the dancers to arrive. Most of the students appear to be drinking. By the number of people in this photo, it appears only a fraction of the 47 lacrosse team members are there.

 

12 a.m.: This is the first picture of the strippers. Students are watching the show, but not grabbing or attempting to touch the women. Bruises are clearly visible on the legs and thighs of the alleged victim.

 

12:00:40 a.m.: Another picture taken 40 seconds later shows bruises on the accuser's knees. Her right knee appears to have an open cut.

 

12:03:57 a.m.: About four minutes after arriving, a picture shows the strippers leaving the room. The photo clearly shows that the alleged victim left behind one of her shoes.

 

Between 12:10 a.m. and 12:30 a.m.: No photos were taken between this time.

 

12:30:12 a.m.: The next photo shows the alleged victim on the back porch, carrying what appears to be her purse and a makeup bag. Her clothes are intact.

 

12:30:47 a.m.: A photo taken 30 seconds later shows the alleged victim on the porch and she appears to smile.

 

12:31:26 a.m.: But 30 seconds after that, a photo shows the alleged victim stumbling down the back steps of the house.

 

12:37:58 a.m.: A series of photos are taken, all showing the woman lying on her left side on the back porch, seemingly passed out or asleep. She had visible cuts on her legs and buttocks that did not appear in the previous photos.

 

The cuts may be from falling. The cuts on her buttocks line up with the edge of a screen door she may have hit on the way down.

 

12:41 a.m.: The final photo shows the accuser and the second dancer in a black car. The accuser is in the passengers seat.

 

Many of the photos taken on the back porch show pink splotches, which the defense says is undried nail polish. They claim the accuser was polishing her nails in the bathroom between 12:10 a.m. and 12:30 a.m. - - not being raped

[Kyyle23]

There is a video on Cnn.com that has some evidence that Seiligmann wasnt at the party when the rape occurred. Pretty interesting stuff, he was in a cab at 12:19 AM and brought to a bank to withdraw money, and he was then dropped off at his dorm at 12:41, which is confirmed by his security card swipe. This seems interesting.

 

edit: did I say it was getting interesting?

Edited April 20, 2006 by kyyle23

[mr_genius]

There is a video on Cnn.com that has some evidence that Seiligmann wasnt at the party when the rape occurred.  Pretty interesting stuff, he was in a cab at 12:19 AM and brought to a bank to withdraw money, and he was then dropped off at his dorm at 12:41, which is confirmed by his security card swipe.  This seems interesting.

 

edit:  did I say it was getting interesting?

 

 

yea, all the evidence is starting to point towards him not even being at the party.

Edited April 20, 2006 by mr_genius

[Rex Kickass]

Everything we're seeing is from the Defense, correct?

 

Well, its a nice distraction from the Chinese premier making a visit to the White House despite keeping American media employee prisoners and persecuting Christians and other religious leaders.

[jackie hayes]

Everything we're seeing is from the Defense, correct?

 

Well, its a nice distraction from the Chinese premier making a visit to the White House despite keeping American media employee prisoners and persecuting Christians and other religious leaders.

From the defense, but specific and easy to verify. They claim they have cell phone records, and an atm receipt, and campus records. And the cab driver was on CNN saying, yes, I drove that guy. He's not a defense lawyer, as far as I know.

[Balta1701]

From the defense, but specific and easy to verify.  They claim they have cell phone records, and an atm receipt, and campus records.  And the cab driver was on CNN saying, yes, I drove that guy.  He's not a defense lawyer, as far as I know.

Again, it's at least worth considering that yes, everything from the defense is easy to verify, but we have no idea how easy to verify the prosecution's evidence might be, because they're not leaking.

[samclemens]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192565,00.html

 

i told you all this story was complete bulls*** and was called an idiot, a racist, and i cant remember what else. well, i was right, so eat crow!

 

edit: im not totaly serious, but even if this story doesnt convince you, it does for me, since this other stripper (who looks disgusting) is now changing her s*** up so she can jump on this gravy train.

Edited April 21, 2006 by samclemens