Duke Lacrosse Rape Allegation

[Kyyle23]

Who changed their story? The accuser hasnt said a word.

[jackie hayes]

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.

I was just responding, and Rex didn't say anything about the prosecution. Yes, it's from a party that has a definite position. If it were vague evidence, I'd take a wait and see approach. But with that much detail, it's pretty strong evidence.

 

Which isn't to say it's literally impossible that it's wrong. There are 2 separate sources of timing information, iirc. The prosecution will have to discredit both. Of course, that may be possible.

 

I'm not saying the prosecution has nothing, but remember that the 2 sets of information cannot be independent. Maybe he has something, but unless you think the defense is literally forging all this evidence and pressuring witnesses, how do you figure this could be consistent with the receipt, phone calls, dorm access, etc?

Edited April 21, 2006 by jackie hayes

[Flash Tizzle]

Who changed their story?  The accuser hasnt said a word.

I don't believe Sam was referring to the accuser. Rather, the accuser's colleague orginally told police she doubted the alleged rape occured. It was only after the defense team released photos of the supposed victim she changed her mind.

 

Reading her quote, she wasn't there--has no proof--yet believes something occured. Funny how she would never admit raped occured, yet in the next sentence replies: "In all honestly, I think they're guilty." Well, what exactly are they guilty of stripper #2?

[jackie hayes]

I don't believe Sam was referring to the accuser. Rather, the accuser's colleague orginally told police she doubted the alleged rape occured. It was only after the defense team released photos of the supposed victim she changed her mind.

 

Reading her quote, she wasn't there--has no proof--yet believes something occured. Funny how she would never admit raped occured, yet in the next sentence replies: "In all honestly, I think they're guilty." Well, what exactly are they guilty of stripper #2?

One of my favorite Will & Grace quotes -- "You know how I know? Because I really, really think so."

[Steff]

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.

 

 

Several folks have expressed doubts, so I'm pretty sure you weren't called a racist and an idiot because you thought the story was false.

[Kyyle23]

The defense attorneys are seeking to file a motion to suppress the identification of Seligmann and Finnerty because no pictures of non-team members were included in the presentation.

 

Also, here is the timeline of events that supposedly clear Seligmann.

[fathom]

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.

 

All I have to say is that the words coming out of the mouth of the 2nd stripper are pathetic! I hope she gets just torn apart in the media.

[Kyyle23]

All I have to say is that the words coming out of the mouth of the 2nd stripper are pathetic!  I hope she gets just torn apart in the media.

Roberts, who is a divorced single mother like the accuser, took umbrage at the notion that she should not try to make something out of her experience.

 

"Why shouldn't I profit from it?" she asked. "I didn't ask to be in this position ... I would like to feed my daughter."

 

Which can also be read as "Why shouldnt I profit from my friend getting raped?"

 

I hope that this isnt the prosecutions star witness, the defense is going to tear apart her credibility from her little $25,000 embezzling problem.

Edited April 22, 2006 by kyyle23

[Controlled Chaos]

Law or lynch law?

Apr 25, 2006

by Thomas Sowell

 

People who were not within 1,000 miles of Duke University have already taken sides in the case of a stripper who has accused Duke lacrosse players of rape. One TV talk show hostess went ballistic when a guest on her program raised questions about the stripper's version of what happened.

Apparently we dare not question accusations of rape when it involves the new sacred trinity of race, class, and gender.

 

Media irresponsibility is one thing. Irresponsibility by an agent of the law is something else -- and much more dangerous. Prosecutors are not just supposed to prosecute. They are supposed to prosecute the right people in the right way. In this case, prosecutor Michael Nifong has proceeded in the wrong way.

 

Having an accuser or a witness pick out the accused from a lineup is standard procedure. That procedure not only serves to identify someone to be charged with a crime, it also tests the credibility of the accuser or witness -- or it should, if the lineup is not stacked.

 

 

A lineup should include not only people suspected of a crime but also other people, so that it tests whether the accuser or witness can tell the difference, and is therefore credible. But the stripper who claimed to have been raped by members of the Duke lacrosse team was presented with a lineup consisting exclusively of photographs of members of the lacrosse team.

 

In other words, whoever she picked out had to be a lacrosse player and would be targeted, with no test whatever of her credibility, because there was no chance for her to pick out somebody who had no connection with the team or the university. Apparently District Attorney Nifong was no more wiling to test the accuser's credibility than was the TV talk show hostess who went ballistic, though credibility is often crucial in rape cases.

 

Mr. Nifong went public with his having DNA evidence collected. Then, after the DNA failed to match that of the accused, the students were arrested anyway and their bail was set at $400,000 -- in a community where a youth accused of murder had bail set at $50,000.

 

When a prosecutor acts like he has made up his mind and doesn't want to be confused by the facts, that is when the spirit of the lynch mob has entered the legal system. When this happens on the eve of an election for the prosecutor, it looks even uglier.

 

If the young men accused of rape are in fact guilty, they need to be proved guilty because they are guilty, not because an election is coming up or there is racial hype in the media or a legally stacked deck. More important, we need to know that the rule of law is there for all of us, regardless of who we are or who our accuser might be.

 

Even beyond this case, we are increasingly becoming a society in which some people are allowed to impose high costs on other people at little or no cost to themselves. This sets the stage for extortion, not only of money but also of legal plea-bargains extorted by ambitious prosecutors.

 

The stripper, for example, does not even pay the price of having her name known, while the names and pictures of the accused young men are all over the media. Even if they are acquitted, or the charges thrown out of court, this case will follow them and they will be under a cloud for the rest of their lives.

 

Mr. Nifong has said that he has a third person whom he may indict. If so, he has already demonstrated to that third person what he can do by disgracing the other two and putting a heavy financial burden on their families for bail and lawyers. If that third person cannot stand the disgrace or his family cannot afford the expense, that is leverage for getting him to say whatever the prosecutor wants him to say.

 

This case presents opportunities as well as pressures. Race hustlers are having a field day, including the inevitable Jesse Jackson.

 

A fellow stripper who was at the same party sees in this an opportunity -- in her own words -- to "spin this to my advantage."

 

The biggest opportunity that this case presents is for District Attorney Michael Nifong to win his election, even if the case falls apart later and the law is cheapened by all this.

[Soxbadger]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/25/duke.suspect/

 

One of the defendants Finnerty is now also being tried for an unrelated assault charge, in which he attacked some one when they told Finnerty and his friends to stop calling him gay.

 

Basically Finnerty is f***ed, part of his probation was that he could not be anywhere that alcohol was served so even if the stripper story turns out false, he will still go down for the assault charge. He even violated the curfew that was set for him, so this may be the leak in the damn that brings down the whole defense.

 

If Finnerty is innocent in the stripper case, he has to flip at this point. The prosecutor will most likely be able to get him out of the assault case if he is willing to work with the authorities to convict the rapist. Otherwise Finnerty will go down for sure on the assault charge, and then will have a mountain to climb in the rape case. Because the assault will be a prior felony conviction within the last year, it will be allowed into the rape trial as impeaching evidence if Finnerty decides to take the stand.

 

If the defense's grand idea was to attack the victims credibility, it will be much harder now that Finnerty's past is being revealed.

[NorthSideSox72]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/25/duke.suspect/

 

One of the defendants Finnerty is now also being tried for an unrelated assault charge, in which he attacked some one when they told Finnerty and his friends to stop calling him gay.

 

Basically Finnerty is f***ed, part of his probation was that he could not be anywhere that alcohol was served so even if the stripper story turns out false, he will still go down for the assault charge. He even violated the curfew that was set for him, so this may be the leak in the damn that brings down the whole defense.

 

If Finnerty is innocent in the stripper case, he has to flip at this point. The prosecutor will most likely be able to get him out of the assault case if he is willing to work with the authorities to convict the rapist. Otherwise Finnerty will go down for sure on the assault charge, and then will have a mountain to climb in the rape case. Because the assault will be a prior felony conviction within the last year, it will be allowed into the rape trial as impeaching evidence if Finnerty decides to take the stand.

 

If the defense's grand idea was to attack the victims credibility, it will be much harder now that Finnerty's past is being revealed.

So... now it might be rich scumbag vs poor scumbag?

 

I don't want to hear anymore about any of these people.

[jackie hayes]

This has been known for a long time, Sb.

 

But for the assault he'd get 180 days and (for his family) pocket change. You're telling me that if he fesses up for raping someone he'll get a better deal than that?

[samclemens]

This has been known for a long time, Sb.

 

But for the assault he'd get 180 days and (for his family) pocket change.  You're telling me that if he fesses up for raping someone he'll get a better deal than that?

 

you are right. finnerty will be convicted of a felonious assault in a completely unrelated incident. yeah, it will make him look bad at the rape trial, but that doesnt change the fact that the strippers alleging this are money-hungry liars and that this case is complete b.s. from what we have seen thus far. soxbadger is acting like either of them have a chance of being convicted. in my humble opinion, we havent seen a single fact yet to show that this entire trial's purpose is for some lying strippers to get money (s***, she already has a scholarship) and a DA to get re-elected.

[jackie hayes]

you are right. finnerty will be convicted of a felonious assault in a completely unrelated incident. yeah, it will make him look bad at the rape trial, but that doesnt change the fact that the strippers alleging this are money-hungry liars and that this case is complete b.s. from what we have seen thus far. soxbadger is acting like either of them have a chance of being convicted. in my humble opinion, we havent seen a single fact yet to show that this entire trial's purpose is for some lying strippers to get money (s***, she already has a scholarship) and a DA to get re-elected.

To be clear, I'm not backing the "money-hungry" part. The 'other' stripper, okay, sure. But the woman claiming she was raped, I'm not at all sure about her motivation.

[Texsox]

you are right. finnerty will be convicted of a felonious assault in a completely unrelated incident. yeah, it will make him look bad at the rape trial, but that doesnt change the fact that the strippers alleging this are money-hungry liars and that this case is complete b.s. from what we have seen thus far. soxbadger is acting like either of them have a chance of being convicted. in my humble opinion, we havent seen a single fact yet to show that this entire trial's purpose is for some lying strippers to get money (s***, she already has a scholarship) and a DA to get re-elected.

 

I thought the trial would be in a court room, not via press conferences with the defense attorney.

[mr_genius]

I thought the trial would be in a court room, not via press conferences with the defense attorney.

 

 

i'm so sick of this case already (it's getting as bad as the girl that is missing in Aruba or whatever)

[Balta1701]

i'm so sick of this case already (it's getting as bad as the girl that is missing in Aruba or whatever)

You need about 6-8 weeks at this intensity of media coverage before it hits that level.

[Soxbadger]

Clemens,

 

Any prosecutor worth a damn will not reveal ANY evidence prior to trial to the media.

 

The burden of proof is entirely on the prosecution, therefore it is in their advantage to sandbag. Some prosecutors take this to the extreme, sandbagging their best argument all the way to rebuttal (which comes after defenses closing argument). This tactic is very risky because if defense waives their closing then you do not get a rebuttal.

 

But the main thing is, Finnerty will have no credibility which will make it very hard for the defense to put on a case for him. Also most legal scholars will say that the taint of a prior conviction is so bad that a defendant almost never can over come it if the case is close. When a jury hears "This kid has beaten some one for being gay" they are not going to have to stretch it very far that "this kid raped a black girl", or even "this kid assaulted (or battered)" a black girl".

 

Im not saying this will convict them, I honestly have no clue as I am not the prosecutor and do not have the information.

 

Hayes,

 

What I am saying is that if he is willing to flip on another lacrosse member, the prosecutor will most likely be able to get him off on the Rape and the Assault. He wont have to spend any time in jail, and will not have to have a felony on his record.

 

That is going on the assumption that Finnerty has information that would help the prosecution in the rape case, and that he was not the main rapist.

[jackie hayes]

Hayes,

 

What I am saying is that if he is willing to flip on another lacrosse member, the prosecutor will most likely be able to get him off on the Rape and the Assault. He wont have to spend any time in jail, and will not have to have a felony on his record.

 

That is going on the assumption that Finnerty has information that would help the prosecution in the rape case, and that he was not the main rapist.

A "main rapist"? So the da will announce, 'It's okay to give him a deal, he only raped her a little bit.'

 

She reportedly said that she was 100% certain that he was one of the rapists. If that's true, how the hell do you cut this guy a deal less than 180 days? If it's not, what does that say about her credibility, and the viability of this case?

[Soxbadger]

That is why you do not release the evidence.

 

If you start with one story and then evidence comes that disputes that story, you look silly. Its much better to let all the evidence come out, and then see what transpires.

 

All we know is that she ID'd 3 people, we do not know in what context or what she has said about the 3.

 

And DA's cut deals all the time for the person who is willing to turn in his friends first. If letting one of them get off easy, means the other 2 are convicted a DA has to weigh that against potentially not convicting any of them. It all depends on the evidence and how good they feel about whether or not they can get a conviction.

 

If they are waivering and Finnerty testifying will ensure conviction, I think they would offer a plea. Maybe not completely off, but substantially reduced sentence.

[jackie hayes]

That is why you do not release the evidence.

 

If you start with one story and then evidence comes that disputes that story, you look silly. Its much better to let all the evidence come out, and then see what transpires.

 

All we know is that she ID'd 3 people, we do not know in what context or what she has said about the 3.

 

And DA's cut deals all the time for the person who is willing to turn in his friends first. If letting one of them get off easy, means the other 2 are convicted a DA has to weigh that against potentially not convicting any of them. It all depends on the evidence and how good they feel about whether or not they can get a conviction.

 

If they are waivering and Finnerty testifying will ensure conviction, I think they would offer a plea. Maybe not completely off, but substantially reduced sentence.

What are you talking about? The defense has a right to see the evidence, and they showed the police report detailing the identifications to a reporter who confirms their version of that report -- that the accuser was shown only lax players, and that she said she was 100% certain about Seligmann and Finnerty (and 90% certain of another, unnamed player).

 

So you're saying that, not only are the defense attorneys lying, but on top of that, the reporter is conspiring to feed this misinformation to the public. Okay...

 

As for cutting a deal, I get the concept, thanks. The question is whether he'd "flip" to avoid the assault charge, as you suggested. A full conviction on that charge is 180 days. A sentence that substantially reduced for this case is not going to happen.

[YASNY]

If this 'victim' did happen to randomly choose 3 lax players from a collection of photos from only lax players, then this kid with assault charge is getting a raw deal. He was under conditions to stay out of trouble and perform some community service. It's possible that the only reason he is in trouble is that she basically could have been told, pick 3 ... pick any 3.

[Steff]

If this 'victim' did happen to randomly choose 3 lax players from a collection of photos from only lax players, then this kid with assault charge is getting a raw deal.  He was under conditions to stay out of trouble and perform some community service.  It's possible that the only reason he is in trouble is that she basically could have been told, pick 3 ... pick any 3.

 

 

He was under conditions to not be where alcohol was being consumed.

[YASNY]

He was under conditions to not be where alcohol was being consumed.

 

I wasn't aware of that. Thanks.

[Soxbadger]

Hayes,

 

The defense has a right to see the information. But the DA does not have to turn over the information "as soon as he receives it". So long as the defense gets the information with enough time to prepare for trial, it is okay. Often times a DA will show up the morning of a trial and have "new evidence". The defense will then ask for continuation so that they can look at the evidence.

 

Right now they are not even close to that stage. There have been no depositions, which is where the stripper would have to tell her story. As you can see the defense is trying to take the case to the public, so they are going to jade whatever they can when they give it over to the media. This case is some what of an aberration because generally defense attorneys will not want to show their cards this early.

 

As for the ID, it is unlikely that evidence will ever get into trial. Its hearsay through anyone else but the stripper and when she testifies she can easily explain what happened in a different way then it is on the police report. Im not exactly sure what the rules in NC jurisdiction are to police reports, but some jurisdictions do not allow them because they are based entirely on hearsay which is not allowed at trial. Another problem is because she was not under oath, they can not use the statement as a "prior inconsistent" statement for impeachment purposes, as you can not perfect the impeachment.

 

YASNY,

 

Its going to get worse. Because the defense came out and tried to humiliate the DA, the DA is going to f*** with all those lacrosse players. I heard last night that there are more lacrosse players who are going to be charged with crimes that they got diversion for, and none of them are even being connected to the rape. I swear I heard a number around 25 more being re-charged with older crimes, but that seems pretty high.

 

Anyway you slice it, the DA is going to start a war of attrition until he gets what he wants. Wrong place wrong time for alot of these kids, and I feel bad for the collateral damage that is going to happen. The only thing that may stop this is if a Duke player comes forward and helps with a conviction. This is the game the govt plays, its standard procedure in mob and gang cases. If you cant get the "big" guy, you go after everyone else and hope that one of them is willing to cut a deal.