Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Plaintiffs’ Response to Nifong’s Motion to Dismiss
Topic Started: Jan 31 2009, 12:32 AM (8,060 Views)
abb
Member Avatar

Quasimodo
Feb 5 2009, 01:59 PM
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.
If you remember, Howlin was also in on the Dan Rather Memogate bust. She and Tanker KC spotted the type font issue on the docs.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

If Chalmers thought he was retired, why was there never an announcement for his replacement by the durham city manager or mayor? What were they waiting for to replace the freakin police chief of a large city in NC who said he thought he was retired?

Chalmers was not retired. He ran from a frame and hid.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
darby

abb
Feb 5 2009, 01:32 PM
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]
Those were really fun... we went through threads so fast back then we had to leave bread crumbs so posters could find their way to the next one...

I wonder whatever happened to that Richard Kimball fella..??? :$
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sceptical

(I just came across this interesting comment from John In Carolina's Blog)

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2009/01/plaintiffs-response-to-nifongs-latest.html

Ex-prosecutor said...
When prosecutors step out of their traditional role as a courtroom advocate, they no longer have absolute immunity. An example would be when a DA goes with police officers as they execute a search warrant. This is a non-traditional role and the DA can be liable, just as police officers are, if, for instance, the warrant is executed at the wrong address and the homeowner is shot.

My opinion always has been that Mr. Nifong probably would not have absolute for many of the things I think he did, such as rig the photo lineup and ask that a deceptive DNA report be prepared. The same may be true of his outrageous statements regarding the three defendants.

As of now, I don't see how he can expect to have the suit against him dismissed because no depositions have been taken and nobody can be sure of exactly what he did.

In the depositions, each group of defendants (Duke, police, Nifong, DNA etc.) will want to dump on the others, to deflect liability from themselves. The city of Durham can be tagged only if police supervisory personnel violated the plaintiffs' rights. So, to whatever extent they can, police supervisors will dump on lower ranking officers.

I haven't kept up with the law on prosecutorial liability for ten years or so. But at that time, there simply were no court decision regarding the screwy things that Mr. Nifong did to involve himself in this case.

Following law school, I was a law clerk for a federal judge and I cannot imagine how the judge to whom this is assigned is going to handle this. I expect that he has two clerks and they must sift through huge briefs drafted by teams of many lawyers and arguing complicated issues for which they are few court, if any, previous legal decisions.
Edited by sceptical, Feb 6 2009, 10:42 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jmoo

sceptical
Feb 6 2009, 10:41 PM
(I just came across this interesting comment from John In Carolina's Blog)

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2009/01/plaintiffs-response-to-nifongs-latest.html

Ex-prosecutor said...

snip

In the depositions, each group of defendants (Duke, police, Nifong, DNA etc.) will want to dump on the others, to deflect liability from themselves. The city of Durham can be tagged only if police supervisory personnel violated the plaintiffs' rights. So, to whatever extent they can, police supervisors will dump on lower ranking officers.

Can the city be held liable for the admitted policy of disproportionate treatment of Duke Students?

Or, is this off the table since (I believe) the USC charges are off the table for the City?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jmoo

sceptical
Feb 6 2009, 10:41 PM
(I just came across this interesting comment from John In Carolina's Blog)

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2009/01/plaintiffs-response-to-nifongs-latest.html

Ex-prosecutor said...

snip

In the depositions, each group of defendants (Duke, police, Nifong, DNA etc.) will want to dump on the others, to deflect liability from themselves. The city of Durham can be tagged only if police supervisory personnel violated the plaintiffs' rights. So, to whatever extent they can, police supervisors will dump on lower ranking officers.



Can the city be held liable for the admitted policy of disproportionate treatment of Duke Students?

Or, is this off the table since (I believe) the USC charges are off the table for the City?

Edited by jmoo, Feb 7 2009, 12:23 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sdsgo

jmoo, even if the City prevails in its motion for partial summary judgment on the state-law tort claims based on governmental immunity, the federal 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985 claims would remain in play.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jmoo

sdsgo
Feb 7 2009, 04:08 PM
jmoo, even if the City prevails in its motion for partial summary judgment on the state-law tort claims based on governmental immunity, the federal 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985 claims would remain in play.
Thanks sdsgo -- I had it backwards... thinking they were asking for summary judgement on the federal charges.

Edited by jmoo, Feb 9 2009, 08:31 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply