Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Plaintiffs’ Response to Nifong’s Motion to Dismiss
Topic Started: Jan 31 2009, 12:32 AM (8,062 Views)
Baldo
Member Avatar

My understanding is Chalmers was still involved but took a very low profile, so low as to be invisible. It is one of the questions that needs to be answered.

Certainly he raised his head with the ridiculous & absurd report to Baker

It smelled so bad they even the Snooze Room blasted it.

From KC - May 2007
Today’s lead editorial in the N&O dismisses the Baker/Chalmers report as “wasted words” that amount to little more than “a series of partial explanations and excuses.” The paper says that an independent investigation is needed.

For instance, “In his report, Police Chief Chalmers doesn’t answer the who-was-in-charge question directly, but speaks of ‘collaboration’ with the D.A. and says his detectives pursued leads independently of Nifong. Yet the lead detective wrote in his case notes that he had been instructed within days of the alleged attack to go through Nifong.”

The report, N&O editors note, “is similarly obtuse about a critical photo lineup that Nifong used to gain indictments against the students,” and fails “to explain why detectives shared the [April 4] tainted identifications with Nifong, who used them to keep the case alive.”

The basic issue, according to the N&O: “Durham police still need a realistic look at their actions. Without a complete accounting, how can the department learn from this case?”

The Herald-Sun, meanwhile, awakened from its editorial somnolence to agree. The paper terms the Baker/Chalmers report “deeply flawed,” and says that it failed to answer either why the DPD pressed forward despite an improper photo lineup and why the department neglected to more seriously question Crystal Mangum’s credibility.

“It appears,” the H-S has finally realized, “everyone knew at the time the process was flawed. To have that—and only that—become the basis for indictments for felony rape charges seems unbelievable now.” Meanwhile, “The report discusses the police department's supposed willingness to hear exculpatory evidence from the defense. But the main evidence against the defendants was coming from [Mangum], and the police appear to have done next to nothing to question her credibility. Again, we can’t know for sure, because the report doesn’t tell us.”

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/05/n-h-s-dismiss-bakerchalmers-report.html


Edited by Baldo, Feb 5 2009, 10:38 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

Joan Foster
Feb 5 2009, 06:22 AM
abb
Feb 5 2009, 06:17 AM
Joan Foster
Feb 5 2009, 06:06 AM
Can anyone tell me when we found out that Chalmers was taking "leave?" Was it officially announced? When did we find out that Nifong took charge of the investigation?
Probably will have to research the FR threads. They're probably the only ones still online that are accessible. The keyword that picks them out is "dukelax."
Thanks, Abb. I'll try that. If anyone here knows, I'd appreciate the help.
Joan, IIRC there was a report (newspaper) that Chalmers indicated that he had thought he was retired, but that some paperwork had a glitch, so he would retire when the paperwork was fixed. It was expected to take about ....1 and 1/2 years. I have remained mystified by that and it still shocks me.
Edited by jewelcove, Feb 5 2009, 11:19 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

COPYRIGHT 2006 The News & Observer

Byline: Samiha Khanna

Jul. 14--DURHAM -- After 3 1/2 years as Durham's police chief, Steve Chalmers plans to leave his post in another 18 months. Chalmers, who has remained stoic during criticism over his low profile during the Duke lacrosse team rape investigation, said in a recent interview that his last days leading the police force will be in December 2007.

City officials said Thursday that they knew Chalmers, 52, was nearing retirement but that he had not previously given them a timeline. He has been a Durham officer since 1975. "I've been working real hard to put...

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

Thanks, everyone. It is all so strange.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/duke_lacrosse/story/644721.html

"Where was the Chief?"

*******
From D-I-W:

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/05/astonishing-mr-chalmers.html

"The Astonishing Mr. Chalmers"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

Quasimodo
Feb 5 2009, 08:21 AM
Joan Foster
Feb 5 2009, 06:22 AM
abb
Feb 5 2009, 06:17 AM
Joan Foster
Feb 5 2009, 06:06 AM
Can anyone tell me when we found out that Chalmers was taking "leave?" Was it officially announced? When did we find out that Nifong took charge of the investigation?
Probably will have to research the FR threads. They're probably the only ones still online that are accessible. The keyword that picks them out is "dukelax."
Thanks, Abb. I'll try that. If anyone here knows, I'd appreciate the help.
As far as I can tell, he absented himself from the case from the very start :

"Also on March 24...Cpt. Lamb ordered all Durham police "to go through Mr. Nifong for any directions as to how to conduct matters in this case." This arrangement contradicted the department's official chain of authority: Officers in District 2... reported to Commander Ed Sarvis, who was subject to orders from Chief Steven Chalmers. Yet Sarvis was bypassed, while Chalmers absented himself from the investigation, claiming a need to tend to his sick mother, who lived right there in Durham."
--UPI, p. 63

Chalmers' daughter was arrested in June :


http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1055871/

Durham Police Chief's Daughter Arrested
Stefanie Chalmers

Posted: Jun 22, 2006

DURHAM, N.C. — The daughter of Durham Police Chief Steve Chalmers was arrested this week for allegedly assaulting a woman with a vehicle.

Stefanie Chalmers was charged with felony assault with a deadly weapon in connection with the April incident, authorities said.

(snip)

(Now, if she could just get Crystal's lawyer, she could probably have that felony assault with an auto reduced down to a misdemeanor...)
So even before they have the DNA back, they set up Nifong as the ringmaster....why? Were they already pretty sure they "were fu**ed" and needed someone to drive this thing to trial? I think Chalmers just did not have the stomach for it. Or was there another reason to remove him?

But it is just too strange to not have some real significance.
Edited by Joan Foster, Feb 5 2009, 11:34 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

jewelcove
Feb 5 2009, 11:24 AM
From the NandO article:

""Nothing less than civilization as we know it is at stake here," Whichard said. "

Has anyone heard anything from this clown since?
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

An old one, but still valid.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

The Johnsville News has a little refresher re Chalmers thinking he was already retired when the Lacrosse Frame occured from it's post on July 2006: http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2006/07/duke-case-cleaning-house.html

"Durham Police Chief Steve Chalmers says he will retire from his post next year.

Chalmers says he plans to leave the police department in December 2007. He has served as police chief since his appointment in 2002.

Chief Chalmers actually retired about a year ago. He sent the paperwork in and headed off to his bass boat. Unfortunately, there was a bureaucratic snafu and the paperwork was lost. Hard to believe that could happen in Durham, right. He's been told to resubmit his paperwork and everything should be processed and finalized by December 2007. No need to come in from the bass boat."


Edited by jewelcove, Feb 5 2009, 11:52 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

Chalmer's breaks his silence 7/06:

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=4345248
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

removed by poster
Edited by jewelcove, Feb 5 2009, 01:04 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeZPU

jewelcove
Feb 5 2009, 11:57 AM
Chalmers "breaks his silence" to say absolutely nothing.

Interesting that Chalmers' last statement implies a trial
will happen with 100% certainty.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

Here are some of the earliest threads on FR about the case. Some of our oldest and dearest friends were in at the start.

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/duke/index?more=4251847
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

Wow! Talk about some memories flooding back. To my knowledge this was the first post anywhere that I know of expressing skepticism about the case.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1605181/posts#5

To: quantim

Something smells about this story.

5 posted on Wednesday, March 29, 2006 1:46:39 AM by Howlin ("It doesn't have a policy. It doesn't need to have a policy. What's the point of a Democratic policy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

That's the immortal line to remember :

"Something smells about this case."

There should be a "Howlin" award for those who help detect and expose fishy prosecutions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply