Viewing Single Post From: Updated Duke Lacrosse Case Chronology March 13-31, 2006

Viewing Single Post From: Updated Duke Lacrosse Case Chronology March 13-31, 2006
Quasimodo	Jun 19 2009, 03:25 PM
Posts: 4,878 Group: Tier1 Member #17 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	Quote: SUNDAY MARCH 19 : N&0 second article on the case: Alleged rape was at party, police said (snip) "It was an act where alcohol was involved," Gottlieb said. (snip) Gottlieb again. Why wouldn't the press do direct to the chief, or to a public relations officer, and ask for details? Were they dealing directly with Gottlieb (or was Gottlieb the one who was dealing directly with them)? Are officers usually permitted to speak directly to the press without an official police spokesperson? And why speak with Gottlieb, when it's Himan, not Gottlieb, who is the chief investigator on the case? Where is Himan quoted in any article? Quote: TUESDAY MARCH 21: Sgt. Mark Gottlieb personally serves the subpoena for Mangum’s medical records on Levicy at Duke Hospital. Bizarre. Usually supboenas are given to hospital administrators or legal counsel. Somehow Gottlieb cut out all the middlemen. This might be be expected of a rookie, but not a veteran officer. Was he deliberately bypassing Manly and trying to get a statement from Levicy? Quote: Mike Nifong calls Capt. Jeff Lamb and asks to take over case [Ekstrand Para 487]. Lamb instructs Gottlieb and Himan to take direction from Nifong. Bizarre. And did the Chief sign off on this? What if the Chief found out afterward and did not approve? Did Lamb take this responsibility by himself? And did Nifong bypass the Chief? Quote: Durham PD Cpl. David Addison starts his campaign to stigmatize the lacrosse team in statements to the press as the Durham PD spokesman. SATURDAY MARCH 25: Duke Crisis Management Team meets for the first time. Duke AD Joe Alleva announces the lacrosse team will forfeit two games because of the party. Brodhead issues first statement, urges cooperation with police. Brodhead refuses to meet with lacrosse team parents, who instead are allowed to see Trask, Alleva, Moneta, and Wasiolek. Candlelight vigil is held at 610 N. Buchanan by over 250 supporters of Mangum. N&O publishes in its Saturday edition its exclusive March 24 interview with Mangum, inciting racial aspects: A full PR campaign to force the players to negotiate. Only question is, why did Duke and the DPD cooperate? Quote: Just moments after she and another exotic dancer started to perform, she said, men in the house started barking racial slurs. The two women, both black, stopped dancing. "We started to cry," she said. "We were so scared." (snip) Demonstrably untrue, and something for which the N&O would be civilly liable, as well. Quote: SUNDAY MARCH 26: Potbanger protest at 610 N. Buchanan, including “castrate” sign. Spontaneous, or organized? Quote: Nifong begins a news media blitz, giving over 70 interviews in succeeding days. Nifong threatens to arrest lacrosse team members who were at party as accessories to rape. Gottlieb and Himan prepare search warrant application for Ryan McFadyen’s room containing inflammatory e-mail; signed but sealed by Judge Stephens. More public PR blitz to try and force a plea deal, when he knows there is no evidence. Quote: Brodhead refuses to meet with attorneys for the lacrosse players who offer exculpatory evidence. Why on earth would a university president desirous of learning all he can about what happened refuse to look at a presentation by defense attorneys? Wouldn't he like to be able to find out that there was no rape, and that a Duke team was not involved in such? Wouldn't he want to even the take the chance of finding this out? All his troubles would be over if he could announce that there had been no rape by a Duke team. His actions make it seem he did not want to find that out. (MOO)


Updated Duke Lacrosse Case Chronology March 13-31, 2006 · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers