| Blog and Media Roundup - Monday, February 9, 2009; News Roundup | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 9 2009, 05:03 AM (328 Views) | |
| abb | Feb 9 2009, 05:03 AM Post #1 |
|
http://heraldsun.southernheadlines.com/durham/4-1092485.cfm Public defender expects to be busy BY MATT GOAD : The Herald-Sun mgoad@heraldsun.com Feb 9, 2009 DURHAM -- The chief public defender for Durham County says the current recession is likely to bring his office more clients and particularly more middle class clients. Lawrence M. Campbell said he hasn't seen a jump yet in the number of people taking advantage of his office's services, but he expects one soon. "Do I anticipate that there will be an increase? Yes I do," Campbell said. "I do think there will be an increase in the months to come," probably beginning in late spring or early summer. He also expects a development that he hasn't seen in his 10 years working in the Public Defender's Office, even during past recessions. The economy is likely to force more middle class, or formerly middle class defendants who up until recently could have afforded their own lawyers to use a public defender. The judge determines whether a defendant qualifies for a public defender. "If they do we will represent them to the best of our abilities," Campbell said. If an there is an influx of middle class clients, Campbell said, he expects most of those cases to involve DWI, driving while license revoked, larceny and identity fraud charges. There are 20 public defenders in the office, including Campbell, who also is responsible for administrative duties. The office also has a court-appointed list of private lawyers to pull from in some instances. Danielle Carman, assistant director of North Carolina's Office of Indigent Defense Services said the increase in demand would be coming at the same time as budget pressures reduce the funds available. The office, which oversees public defenders for the state, is in Durham, at 123 W. Main St. Already, Carman said, the office has lost 4 percent of its budget for this fiscal year. And for next year's budget, the office has been asked to come up with plans 3, 5 and 7 percent less than this year's. The state historically has seen an annual increase of 5.5 percent in demand for public defenders even during more stable economic times, Carman said. "Unfortunately we just don't have that many places where we can cut," Carman said. "We just don't have that much control over demand for our services." |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 9 2009, 05:05 AM Post #2 |
|
http://heraldsun.southernheadlines.com/durham/4-1092442.cfm CRIME LOG Feb 9, 2009 Teen shot in drive-by attack DURHAM -- A 16-year-old was injured in a drive-by shooting Sunday. Police said suspects in a burgundy or red Honda shot the victim in the leg while he walking along Yancy Street near Arnette Avenue. The victim was transported to Duke Hospital with non-life threatening injuries, police said. Anyone with information on the crime is asked to contact Investigator J. Bayne at 560-4440, extension 231, or CrimeStoppers at 683-1200. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 9 2009, 05:13 AM Post #3 |
|
http://www.al.com/sports/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/sports/1234170962267710.xml&coll=2 Former Duke lacrosse players give clinic at Hoover High, tell about teammates' indictments and later clearance on all charges Monday, February 09, 2009 RAY MELICK News staff writer About 50 of the top high school lacrosse players from across the state gathered at Hoover High School over the weekend for a two-day clinic. They got the chance to work with three former members of one of the top programs in NCAA lacrosse, the Duke Blue Devils. Yes, that Duke lacrosse team, the one that made headlines three years ago for something that happened off the field. Ed Douglas, Nick O'Hara and Danny Loftus were on the Duke team that saw its 2006 season shut down after allegations of sexual assault were brought against three of their teammates - Reade Seligmann, David Evans and Collin Finnerty - who were indicted in the spring of that year on charges of rape, kidnapping, and sexual offense. They were later cleared of all charges and declared innocent by the attorney general of North Carolina. It was a story that captivated the nation for over a year, a story that went from outrage against the Duke lacrosse team to bringing about the disgrace and disbarment of Durham County district attorney Mike Nifong for his mishandling of the case. "To some degree, the association with Duke lacrosse and that story will be around for a long, long time," said Douglas, from Baltimore, Md. "The good thing is that we were fortunate to be wealthy enough to fight back," said O'Hara, from Buffalo, N.Y. "If not, there might be three innocent guys sitting in jail today. Instead, they were exonerated and the whole thing wound up doing something good for Durham County (in) getting Mr. Nifong's removal from office." The case started with a woman's allegations that she was sexually assaulted at a March 2006 lacrosse team party, where she was hired as an exotic dancer. Nifong won indictments against Seligmann, Evans and Finnerty, but the charges were later dropped. State attorney general Roy Cooper went a step farther by declaring the three men innocent victims of Nifong's "tragic rush to accuse." Douglas, O'Hara and Loftus were members of the Duke team that lost in the NCAA Championship game in 2005, then lost its 2006 season when Duke officials made the decision to forfeit the season while the alleged rape was being investigated. They returned to play in 2007, where the Blue Devils lost again in the NCAA championship game and reached the final four in 2008. "That first year back, in 2007, everyone was supportive because they understood by then the injustices that occurred," Douglas said. "But by 2008, they were back to cheering against us, because Duke lacrosse is like Duke basketball, the team everyone loves to hate. And to be treated like that was good, because it meant the other had been put behind us." The three players who worked the Hoover clinic graduated from Duke last spring. O'Hara and Loftus continue to play lacrosse professionally, in indoor and outdoor leagues, while Douglas works in Baltimore. They also have teamed up to put on clinics across the country, such as the one put on by Hoover High lacrosse coach Chris Cos. In addition to Hoover, the three have taken part in lacrosse clinics in West Palm Beach, Fla., Columbia, S.C., Little Rock, Ark., and Tulsa, Okla. "We're like going to non-traditional lacrosse areas," Loftus said. "Because we see the sport spreading around the country, and we want to help improve the quality in areas that are not seen as hotbeds of lacrosse." Douglas, O'Hara and Loftus do not run from the events of 2006, when they acknowledge that, for a while, being a member of the Duke lacrosse team was like being on "America's Most Wanted." "We do talk about our story," Loftus said. "These clinics are not just about lacrosse skills. We tell our story, and we talk about using good judgment and the importance of academics." Douglas said the entire incident underscored for them the level of scrutiny that college athletes live under. "On one level, we saw first-hand the difference in appearance vs. reality," he said. "But also we saw how, as athletes, we're held under higher scrutiny from the public. We learned the responsibility that comes with the privilege of playing college athletics. "It's life. We all dealt with what happened in different ways. But we all learned broader life lessons that we carry with us, and try to share with athletes at clinics like this one." E-mail: rmelick@bhamnews.com |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 9 2009, 05:18 AM Post #4 |
|
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6647393 More charges in Atwater case Sunday, February 08, 2009 | 7:18 PM RALEIGH (WTVD) -- More charges have been filed in the federal case against Demario Atwater. UNC student body president Eve Carson's alleged killer is facing more charges, after a Federal Grand Jury updated charges against Demario James Atwater. According to court documents, eight "special findings" were issued against Atwater, including a finding that, "the defendant, Demario James Atwater, committed the homicide offense in an especially heinous, cruel, and depraved manner in that it involved torture and serious physical abuse to the victim, Eve Marie Carson." Documents state further findings suggest that Atwater allegedly planned to cause Carson's death and that one of his motives for the crime was robbery. Click here to read more details filed in the court documents. Investigators believe Carson was taken near her Chapel Hill home on the morning of March 5, 2008. According to an autopsy report, Carson was shot five times including the face. Investigators have said Atwater and the other suspect in her death - Lawrence Lovette Jr. - drove Carson's SUV to various ATMs in Chapel and Durham before the murder. Three weeks ago, Atwater was arraigned in federal court in Greensboro. He pleaded not guilty to all federal charges. The new indictment against Atwater replaces the first federal charges which came in October. Orange County DA Jim Woodall says he will seek the death penalty in the murder trial, but Orange County juries rarely support death sentences. A trial for 22-year-old Atwater is scheduled for November. Lovette's trial could start this summer, but at the time of Carson's death, Lovette was only 17-years-old. So he's not eligible for capital punishment. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 9 2009, 05:52 AM Post #5 |
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/business/media/09newsweek.html?ref=business February 9, 2009 Newsweek Plans Makeover to Fit a Smaller Audience By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA When US Airways Flight 1549 glided safely onto the Hudson River last month, Newsweek did what news organizations have done for more than a century — it sent reporters and photographers to the scene. Considerable effort yielded a modest article on Newsweek’s Web site, and nothing in the printed magazine. If a similar episode happens six months from now, editors say, Newsweek probably will not even bother. Newsweek is about to begin a major change in its identity, with a new design, a much smaller and, it hopes, more affluent readership, and some shifts in content. The venerable newsweekly’s ingrained role of obligatory coverage of the week’s big events will be abandoned once and for all, executives say. “There’s a phrase in the culture, ‘we need to take note of,’ ‘we need to weigh in on,’ ” said Newsweek’s editor, Jon Meacham. “That’s going away. If we don’t have something original to say, we won’t. The drill of chasing the week’s news to add a couple of hard-fought new details is not sustainable.” Newsweek loses money, and the consensus within its parent, the Washington Post Company, and among industry analysts, is that it has to try something big. The magazine is betting that the answer lies in changing both itself and its audience, and getting the audience to pay more. A deep-rooted part of the newsweekly culture has been to serve a mass audience, but that market has been shrinking, and new subscribers come at a high price in call centers, advertising and deeply discounted subscriptions. “Mass for us is a business that doesn’t work,” said Tom Ascheim, Newsweek’s chief executive. “Wish it did, but it doesn’t. We did it for a long time, successfully, but we can’t anymore.” Thirteen months ago, Newsweek lowered its rate base, the circulation promised to advertisers, to 2.6 million from 3.1 million, and Mr. Ascheim said that would drop to 1.9 million in July, and to 1.5 million next January. He says the magazine has a core of 1.2 million subscribers who are its best-educated, most avid consumers of news, and who have higher incomes than the average reader. “We would like to build our business around these people and grow that group slightly,” he said. “These are our best customers. They are our best renewers, and they pay the most.” In the first half of 2008, the average Newsweek subscriber paid less than $25 a year, or 47 cents for each copy — less than one-tenth the $4.95 newsstand price. Newsweek wants to raise that average to $50 a year, Mr. Ascheim said, adding, “If you can’t get people to pay for what they love, we’re all out of business.” From their invention, newsweeklies have been under assault by quicker media, forcing them to ease away from the “what,” toward the “how” and “why,” and more recently, to “here’s what to do about it.” For decades, the magazines evolved quickly enough to keep huge readership and healthy profits. But in the last couple of years, circulation and advertising have plunged, and the weeklies have cut news staffs. Time magazine, the nation’s first and largest newsweekly, remains profitable, though its sales are down, too, but Newsweek is struggling and U.S. News & World Report has become a monthly. Editorially, Newsweek’s plan calls for moving in the direction it was already headed — toward not just analysis and commentary, but an opinionated, prescriptive or offbeat take on events. The current cover article argues that America’s involvement in Afghanistan parallels the Vietnam War, and a companion piece offers a plan for handling that country. Newsweek also plans to lean even more heavily on the appeal of big-name writers like Christopher Hitchens, Fareed Zakaria and George Will. Starting in May, articles will be reorganized under four broad, new sections — one each for short takes, columnists and commentary, long reporting pieces like the cover articles, and culture — each with less compulsion to touch on the week’s biggest events. A new graphic feature on the last page, “The Bluffer’s Guide,” will tell readers how to sound as if they are knowledgeable on a current topic, whether they are or not. The magazine will replace its thin paper with heavier stock that is more appealing to advertisers and readers. It will also put more emphasis on photography. Pages of a mock issue that Mr. Meacham displayed in his office on West 57th Street in Manhattan show a cleaner, less cluttered layout that has more open space and fewer pages that seem an uninterrupted sea of words. The plan turns on raising the amount, for each reader, that Newsweek can charge advertisers, and attracting more ads for luxury goods. It also promises sharply lower costs for printing, distribution, marketing and customer service. Newsweek executives hope they are creating a new niche, but the magazine will not have the terrain to itself. To varying degrees, it will be plying turf already worked by The Economist, The New Yorker, The Atlantic and others. Ad buyers to whom Newsweek gave a partial preview of its transformation said the magazine had to try something new, and that ordinarily, they would consider its plans promising. But most advertisers are cutting back, making any change more of a risk. “It’s no secret that there’s just less money out there, so even if readers react very positively to the changes, it’s a difficult time,” said Scott Kruse, director for print investments at MediaCom US. “The core categories in the newsweeklies have been automotive, financial, tech and pharmaceutical, and all of those are underdelivering in a major way right now. So they’re going to have to bring in new advertisers from new categories, and I just wonder where all those ads are going to come from.” Roberta Garfinkle, senior vice president and director for print strategy at TargetCast TCM, who also got a glimpse of the new Newsweek, said, “I give anybody credit in this difficult environment for saying, ‘What we’re doing doesn’t work anymore and we have to change our model.’ ” “Do I think they’re on the right track? Probably, and they’re certainly on a better track than they were,” she said. “Will it work? We have to wait and see.” |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 9 2009, 07:28 AM Post #6 |
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson239.html he Scourge of Judicial and Prosecutorial Immunity: The Prosecutorial and Police Destruction of the Life of Timothy Cole by William L. Anderson Although my recent column urging that immunity for police, prosecutors, and judges be eliminated received a lot of positive response, nonetheless some lawyers and others wrote to complain that if this actually were done, then those same officers of the court would face endless litigation from unscrupulous criminals. I understand that point well and even am sympathetic to it, but in the end believe that if the rest of us are subject to endless lawsuits from unscrupulous people, then everyone should be put in the same situation, if there is to be equal justice for all. The problem is that many of the unscrupulous people are the officers of the court. Furthermore, there really are few remedies available for people to take when it turns out that the prosecutors, police, and judges have been reckless with the truth and gained a wrongful conviction. Instead, we are told that it is something with which we have to live. With those points in mind, I would like to present the case of Timothy Cole, wrongfully convicted in 1986 for a rape he never committed. Even after another person confessed to the rape, and even after DNA testing had confirmed that Cole did not rape Texas Tech sophomore Michelle Mallin in 1985, it did no good. Timothy Cole died in prison in 1999 from complications from asthma. Cole went to prison because Mallin identified him in court as the rapist. Forget that so-called eyewitness identification is notoriously inaccurate, and forget that Cole’s defense already had alerted police and prosecutor Jim Bob Darnell had been given ample evidence of Cole’s innocence. None of that mattered to any of the government employees seeking a conviction, and a compliant jury rendered its verdict after about six hours of discussion. Today, Darnell is the "Honorable Jim Bob Darnell," a state judge in Texas. Yet, his actions in the Cole case were anything but honorable, for an honorable man seeks for truth, not scalps, and there were lots of holes in Darnell’s case in 1986. First, Mallin noted that the man smoked heavily throughout the ordeal. Cole, who suffered from asthma, did not smoke and, indeed, would have had a severe reaction from smoking. Second, Cole’s fingerprints were not found anywhere on or in Mallin’s car, despite the fact that Mallin testified that the man was not wearing gloves. Third, Cole had an alibi, as friends testified in court that he was with them when the alleged rape occurred. Darnell would have none of that. Even though it was clear that there was a serial rapist on the loose, and that Mallin’s rapist had engaged in similar patterns in other attacks, all of that information was suppressed, thanks to Darnell’s insistence and the judge’s compliance: By then police had backed away from Tim as a suspect in multiple rapes. No physical evidence connected Tim to the crimes, and victims had not recognized him in the lineups. But Darnell blocked near any mention of that in front of jurors. Police on the stand who more than a year earlier had hunted for a serial rapist made little comment on any connection to other rapes. Again and again, Darnell hammered on how the witness had picked Tim out of the lineup…. And when Reggie and friends testified to Tim's focus on school, to his presence at a party at his duplex the night of the attack, Darnell shredded the alibi apart by casting doubt on the memories and motives of the witnesses. Tim's defense attorney, Mike Brown, pushed back. Didn't a victim confuse Tim for Terry Lee Clark? he asked the detectives. Didn't police fail to find any physical evidence that this victim recognized? Didn't the rapes in vacant fields by knifepoint continue after Tim's arrest, like the ones committed by a violent offender, Jerry Wayne Johnson? Darnell: "Are we going to try every rape that occurs in Lubbock County over a six month or one year period of time involving black males?" There was still more reason to doubt, Brown said. Didn't this victim fail to describe some of Tim's more obvious features? Tim removed his shirt for the jury, showing his mottled back and arm, birthmarks that covered his upper body. Darnell: "Is that person going to be embracing that individual and remembering everything about that person's back when they are being sexually assaulted and their soul is being taken from them?" he asked days later in closing as the victim burst into tears. In fact, one of the reasons that Mallin was so sure of her identification was that police investigators insisted that Cole was the man and, in effect, confirmed for her the identification she had made. Yet, today, we know that the defense was right; it wasTerry Wayne Johnson who committed that and other rapes around Lubbock. Terry Wayne Johnson, a heavy smoker. Terry Wayne Johnson, whose DNA would be a match when checked many years later. Let me put this case another way; Mike Brown, Cole’s attorney, did a better job of investigating the case than did the Lubbock Police and Jim Bob Darnell. In fact, the official investigators failed in their efforts, and ultimately depended upon lies, bullying, and intimidation. The last thing they wanted was the truth getting in the way of a conviction, and that was what they got. I am not interested in hearing how police simply "made a mistake." If Mike Brown could figure out the case, why were the police and prosecution so reluctant to do the same? There was another clue that perhaps they were mistaken, Cole’s response to a plea offer. Darnell and the police had promised Cole that if he would plead to a lesser charge, he only would receive probation. Cole refused, saying he would not plead to something he did not do. When in prison, he was offered the chance to get out on parole if only he would admit to having committed the crime for which he was imprisoned. He refused. In other words, Timothy Cole was a man of principle. Jim Bob Darnell, the man called "Your Honor" every day of his working life, is not a man of principle. He decided in 1986 that Cole was guilty, and that he would not let facts or the truth get in the way of securing a conviction. As I have said before, the facts of the case did not point to Timothy Cole. They pointed, instead, to Terry Wayne Johnson, but neither the police nor Darnell were interested in what might have happened. They had their story, and they were going to stick to it. But the sorry tale still was not over. In 1995, after the statute of limitations had run out, Johnson confessed to Mallin’s rape. The people running the "justice" show in Texas were not interested. Cole’s family did not give up trying to clear Timothy of this rape, and they tried and tried, even after Timothy was dead. Finally, and reluctantly, in 2008 the authorities finally got around to testing the DNA, and found a match with Johnson. As one might suspect, there was none with Timothy Cole, but it did not matter, for Cole had been dead for nearly a decade. So, Jim Bob Darnell, now the Honorable Jim Bob Darnell essentially murdered Timothy Cole. He had the opportunity in 1986 to get at the truth, but took the easy way out, bullying his way to a conviction. If he truly were "honorable," he immediately would resign his judgeship and turn in his law license and offer to clean toilets in the Cole household for the rest of his life. Instead, Darnell will continue in his career as a judge, passing sentence perhaps on other people wrongfully convicted, agreeing with prosecutors on plea bargains in cases where the truth never will be permitted to be known. He will be able to continue his comfortable and "respectable" life as though he never had killed Timothy Cole. That is why I believe that we must get rid of judicial and prosecutorial immunity. Not only does immunity protect the Mike Nifongs of this world – people who openly lie in court and are protected in ways that one cannot imagine for others – but it also permits those people who have taken the lives of others to continue as though nothing had happened. In the real world, people are supposed to take responsibility for what they do. If someone sells me a faulty product, I can take legal action against that person. If someone in his or her dealings with me in the world of private enterprise lies or shades the truth, I have some recourse. However, if a prosecutor lies or a judge permits a travesty of justice to occur in his courtroom, it is business as usual. There might be discipline for that person, but generally speaking, the prosecutor gives an excuse, the judge hides behind immunity, and everyone else whose life was shattered is expected to "pick up the pieces and move on." If I or Lew Rockwell or most people reading this article were responsible for the death of another human being, there would be a price to pay. Our futures possibly would hold prison or perhaps execution. At the very least, we would be expected to compensate the wronged party with our own resources. Jim Bob Darnell does not have to worry about that. He had immunity, he has immunity, and he can do what he damn well pleases. Not only will he never have to face justice for killing another human being, but he won’t even be inconvenienced. No, he did not have to make the trip to Austin when the courts finally exonerated Cole, and did not show his face in the courtroom; he was and is immune. No system of justice can be perfect in a world of imperfect people. It is true that most people brought into the criminal justice system are guilty as charged, or have been involved in criminal activity. Furthermore, I also realize that plenty of "jailhouse lawyers" would use their time to file "frivolous" lawsuits against prosecutors, police and judges if given the chance. Yet, I believe there could be a mechanism developed to deal with that problem. Certainly, the courts do not see a problem with, say, Microsoft facing a bevy of lawsuits because Bill Gates believes that the company should have lots of cash on hand. Judges certainly don’t worry about the plaintiffs’ bar destroying the ability of companies to function just because there is money to be made. But my point is that a system in which the proverbial foxes guard the henhouse is no system of justice at all. It is an open invitation for lies and abuse, and the blood of Timothy Cole cries out every day because of it. February 9, 2009 William L. Anderson, Ph.D. [send him mail], teaches economics at Frostburg State University in Maryland, and is an adjunct scholar of the Ludwig von Mises Institute.He also is a consultant with American Economic Services. |
![]() |
|
| chatham | Feb 9 2009, 08:31 AM Post #7 |
|
THE FORBIDDEN Saturday Night Live SKIT SNL did a "Bailout" skit, which has created some rather awkward problems for NBC. They spiked the video and tried to shut it down on the Internet. But aha, there's still some sites that have it. http://msunderestimated.com/SNLBailoutSkit.wmv Very startling to see Saturday Night Live absolutely nail the history and culprits of the Big Bailout. No wonder the powers at NBC pulled the skit. Through impersonations they present stark truth, perhaps one of the most surprising presentations almost allowed on NBC. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 9 2009, 11:38 AM Post #8 |
|
http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2009/02/09/News/Trustees.And.Admins.Meet.On.Financials-3619495.shtml Trustees and admins meet on financials Group looks at Duke's possible revenues By: Chelsea Allison Posted: 2/9/09 Current and former members of the Board of Trustees traveled to Durham this weekend to evaluate the University's finances and to anticipate what Duke might look like in leaner times, Chair Robert Steel confirmed. President Richard Brodhead, in tandem with Steel, Trinity '73, called the meeting more than a month ago to get advice on the economic situation and the University's response to it. The weekend conversations did not center on the endowment's current market value, but the University now has lost in the mid-20 percent range in fiscal year 2009, Executive Vice President Tallman Trask told The Chronicle last week. Instead, the session focused on prospects for investment returns in the long run. These returns make up 19 percent of the University's revenues, according to 2007/2008 Financial Reports. They also discussed how to brace for dips in other revenue sources, including philanthropic giving and research funding. "The economy is going through some of the most wrenching changes of a generation-we know there is going to be an impact on the University," said Michael Schoenfeld, vice president for public affairs and government relations. Indeed, the University's spending budget may need to be reduced by more than $100 million, The Chronicle previously reported. Deficits are likely to affect the University for years to come, especially if officials employ strategies that would help spread out the burden of the losses. Although hypothetical situations were discussed, Schoenfeld said attendees did not dig into specific options. He said the government stimulus will affect Duke, but added that it remains unclear just how, depending what resources go toward education or health care. "What Duke is doing and how Duke is doing it is not something that can happen overnight.... The circumstances are changing," Schoenfeld said. "There is a lot of internal consultation that we need to go through as well." The session this weekend bridged discussions over the past few months with preparations for the Feb. 27 weekend meeting with the full Board. Schoenfeld declined to say who had attended the economic summit but added that it was also not a committee meeting. Broadly, he said, the participants considered how to prepare for what may be a "fundamental change" in the way the University operates. Because the University has enjoyed a period of significant availability of resources, they analyzed what steps Duke might take in absence of those resources. David Graham contributed reporting. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |







7:36 PM Jul 10