When Did Nifong Learn About Crystal's Rape Claim?

Pages:
1
…
9
10
11

When Did Nifong Learn About Crystal's Rape Claim?; J in C Challenges March 23 Copier Story
Topic Started: Jun 14 2009, 09:34 AM (3,100 Views)
nyesq83	Jun 30 2009, 03:29 PM Post #136
Posts: 517 Group: Members Member #239 Joined: Apr 29, 2008	Chatham you have offered some great ideas. Maybe if we look at Gottlieb's notes as always being self-serving, misdirecting and retroactively covering his and his superiors' behinds, it will make a little more sense.



MikeZPU	Jun 30 2009, 04:36 PM Post #137
Posts: 1,486 Group: Tier1 Member #92 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	sceptical Jun 30 2009, 02:15 PM I was working off duty at Durham City Hall when I received a call from Inv. B. Jones in reference to a case she was handling. She stated there was a rape reported at 610 N. Buchanan which is in District 2... ...I explained to Inv. Jones that District 2 Investigations could take over the case if she needed our assistance, however, I explained to her it would be in the best interest of the victim to limit the number of interviews of the traumatic event. I advised her we should first consult with Sgt. Fransler and see if she agreed on this decision to transfer this case to District 2 from the On-Call Team. If in fact District 2 adopted this case, the interview for this evening would need to be canceled and the District 2 Investigator who would be assigned in the morning would interview the victim then. Inv. Jones stated she would discuss this with her Sergeant and get back to me. ** Does it make sense that Inv. Jones would call Gottlieb when Gottlieb is NOT even on duty to ask if District 2 could take over the investigation? You don't call someone off-duty for an important decision like that. How did Jones even know where Gottlieb was (he's off-duty)? Why not call Gottlieb's superior, Sgt. Fansler, directly? This is a bunch of "crock" -- it doesn't pass the smell test. And listen to what Gottlieb tells Jones: don't let the "victim" talk to anyone else. He's telling Jones to limit the number of interviews of the "victim." Why? Because he's already heard that the "victim" is being wildly inconsistent and not credible. Somehow Gottlieb heard about the alleged rape by Dukies and I am sure he placed a quick call to his superior, Sgt. Fansler, and asked if the case could be turned over to him. He may even have asked Sgt Fansler to have Inv. Jones call him at his number at Durham City Hall. Edited by MikeZPU**, Jun 30 2009, 04:41 PM.



nyesq83	Jun 30 2009, 04:43 PM Post #138
Posts: 517 Group: Members Member #239 Joined: Apr 29, 2008	"...[H]owever, I explained to her it would be in the best interest of the victim to limit the number of interviews of the traumatic event." This plays into the conspiracy - papering over Nifong & Co's decision not to interview the complaining witness for as long as possible - if ever - and shows that Gottlieb is patching over the criticism that they did not interview her pronto - He also concludes that CGM was too traumatized to be interviewed, which in his mind negates any notion that she actually WAS talking, frequently, and the story was always different, every time.



LaDukie	Jun 30 2009, 05:09 PM Post #139
Posts: 204 Group: Tier1 Member #123 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	MikeZPU Jun 30 2009, 04:36 PM sceptical Jun 30 2009, 02:15 PM I was working off duty at Durham City Hall when I received a call from Inv. B. Jones in reference to a case she was handling. She stated there was a rape reported at 610 N. Buchanan which is in District 2... ...I explained to Inv. Jones that District 2 Investigations could take over the case if she needed our assistance, however, I explained to her it would be in the best interest of the victim to limit the number of interviews of the traumatic event. I advised her we should first consult with Sgt. Fransler and see if she agreed on this decision to transfer this case to District 2 from the On-Call Team. If in fact District 2 adopted this case, the interview for this evening would need to be canceled and the District 2 Investigator who would be assigned in the morning would interview the victim then. Inv. Jones stated she would discuss this with her Sergeant and get back to me. ** Does it make sense that Inv. Jones would call Gottlieb when Gottlieb is NOT even on duty** to ask if District 2 could take over the investigation? You don't call someone off-duty for an important decision like that. How did Jones even know where Gottlieb was (he's off-duty)? Why not call Gottlieb's superior, Sgt. Fansler, directly? This is a bunch of "crock" -- it doesn't pass the smell test. And listen to what Gottlieb tells Jones: don't let the "victim" talk to anyone else. He's telling Jones to limit the number of interviews of the "victim." Why? Because he's already heard that the "victim" is being wildly inconsistent and not credible. Somehow Gottlieb heard about the alleged rape by Dukies and I am sure he placed a quick call to his superior, Sgt. Fansler, and asked if the case could be turned over to him. He may even have asked Sgt Fansler to have Inv. Jones call him at his number at Durham City Hall. I agree that Gottlieb's story does not make sense. Do we know for sure that he was actually working off-duty at City Hall? Was he working security for the building? the mayor? Who else has an office in City Hall? Maybe there is nothing to this part of the story, but I've always thought it interesting that he happened to be at City Hall when he got "the call." MOO
Posts: 204 Group: Tier1 Member #123 Joined: Apr 28, 2008


nyesq83	Jun 30 2009, 05:17 PM Post #140
Posts: 517 Group: Members Member #239 Joined: Apr 29, 2008	So you are saying that maybe he was told about it AT and BY City Hall?



LaDukie	Jun 30 2009, 05:32 PM Post #141
Posts: 204 Group: Tier1 Member #123 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	I'm just asking the question. Does he work off duty at City Hall often? Regularly? Or was this an unusual occurrence?
Posts: 204 Group: Tier1 Member #123 Joined: Apr 28, 2008


abb	Jun 30 2009, 05:34 PM Post #142
Posts: 8,476 Group: Tier1 Member #4 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	LaDukie Jun 30 2009, 05:32 PM I'm just asking the question. Does he work off duty at City Hall often? Regularly? Or was this an unusual occurrence? IIRC, he was "attached" to city hall at that time. Quas or LP would remember.
Posts: 8,476 Group: Tier1 Member #4 Joined: Apr 28, 2008


sceptical	Jun 30 2009, 08:59 PM Post #143
Posts: 1,088 Group: Tier1 Member #264 Joined: Apr 30, 2008	abb Jun 30 2009, 05:34 PM LaDukie Jun 30 2009, 05:32 PM I'm just asking the question. Does he work off duty at City Hall often? Regularly? Or was this an unusual occurrence? IIRC, he was "attached" to city hall at that time. Quas or LP would remember. Here is a safe link to the Timeline that Gottlieb produced for the City Council: http://www.newsobserver.com/content/media/2007/10/3/Timeline.pdf Here are some excerpts pertinent to Gottlieb's assumption of the case: Quote: 3/14/2006 0444HRS: INV. B.S. JONES SPOKE WITH SGT. FANSLER CONCERNING THE INCIDENT AND VICTIM'S CONDITION. 3/14/2006 1400HRS INV. JONES RECEIVED A TELEPHONE MESSAGE FROM THE VICTIM.NOTIFIED SGT FANSLER. 3/14/2006 1405HRS INV. JONES LEFT A MESSAGE TO MEET VICTIM AT HQ THAT EVENING. 3/14/2006 2230HRS INV. JONES RECEIVED A CALL FROM VICTIM'S FRIEND STATING SHE WAS UNABLE TO KEEP THE APPOINTMENT. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 3 3/15/2006 1640HRS: SGT. GOTTLIEB HAD TELEPHONE CONTACT WITH INV. B.S. JONES REFERENCE THE CASE ASSIGNMENT. INV. JONES ADVISED THAT SHE HAD AN APPOINTMNET 3/14/2006 WHICH THE VICTIM HAD TO RESCHEDULE. INV. JONES NOW ADVISED SHE SET UP A NEW APPOINTMENT WITH THE VICTIM FOR 7PM THIS EVENING. SHE ADVISED SGT. GOTTLIEB SHE WOULD CHECK WITH SGT. FANSLER CONCERNING THE ASSIGNMENT. 3/15/2006 1649HRS. SGT. GOTTLIEB SENT OUT AN EMAIL REQUESTING THE COMMUNITIES HELP. 3/15/2006 1720HRS: SGT. GOTTLIEB HAD TELEPHONE CONTACT WITH SGT. FANSLER AND NOTIFIED HER IF DISTRICT 2 INVESTIGATIONS TOOK THE CASE AS REQUESTED, THEN INV. JONES SHOULD CANCEL HER APPOINTMENT WITH THE VICTIM SO SHE WOULD ONLY HAVE TO GO INTO THE DETAILS ONETIME. SGT. GOTTLIEB WOULD HAVE AN INVESTIGATOR REASSIGNED TO THE CASE SET UP A NEW APPOINTMENT 3/16/2006. INV. JONES IMMEDIATELYCALL THE VICTIM BACK. 3/15/2006 1725HRS:SGT. GOTTLIEB HAD TELEPHONE CONTACT WITH INV. B.S. JONES AND NOTIFIED HER THAT DISTRICT 2 INVESTIGATIONS WOULD HANDLE THE CASE AND TO HAVE THE VICTIM CALL SGT. GOTTLIEB IN THE MORNING. 3/16/2006 0800HRS: SGT. GOTTLIEB CONDUCTED ROLL CALL AND ASSIGNED INV. B.W. HIMAN AS THE LEAD INVESTIGATOR ON THIS CASE. snip



LaDukie	Jun 30 2009, 09:19 PM Post #144
Posts: 204 Group: Tier1 Member #123 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	OK, maybe I'm overly suspicious, but Gottlieb's timeline says he "had telephone contact with Inv. B.S. Jones" at 1640hrs. on the 15th. It doesn't say Jones CALLED HIM. Nine minutes later he sends out an email requesting the community's help? And THEN he "had telephone contact" with Sgt. Fansler? I don't know, but something just doesn't sound right.
Posts: 204 Group: Tier1 Member #123 Joined: Apr 28, 2008


chatham	Jun 30 2009, 09:21 PM Post #145
Posts: 2,807 Group: Tier1 Member #308 Joined: May 2, 2008	Hard to believe anything in that report. It states a rape exam and kit was done at 2:40 in the morning on the 14th. About 9 minutes after arriving at Duke ED.



LaDukie	Jun 30 2009, 09:30 PM Post #146
Posts: 204 Group: Tier1 Member #123 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	chatham Jun 30 2009, 09:21 PM Hard to believe anything in that report. It states a rape exam and kit was done at 2:40 in the morning on the 14th. About 9 minutes after arriving at Duke ED. Well, I certainly agree. It's IS hard to believe anything in that report.
Posts: 204 Group: Tier1 Member #123 Joined: Apr 28, 2008


sceptical	Jul 2 2009, 07:06 AM Post #147
Posts: 1,088 Group: Tier1 Member #264 Joined: Apr 30, 2008	More from J in C on when Nifong knew about the rape charges: http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2009/07/five-news-stories-before-nifongs-copier.html He recaps the N&O and Chronicle stories listed in my Updated Chronology and adds a Herald-Sun article I was not aware of (it will be added to the next revsion of the chronology).



nyesq83	Jul 2 2009, 08:28 AM Post #148
Posts: 517 Group: Members Member #239 Joined: Apr 29, 2008	Quote: 3/14/2006 0444HRS: INV. B.S. JONES SPOKE WITH SGT. FANSLER CONCERNING THE INCIDENT AND VICTIM'S CONDITION. 3/14/2006 1400HRS INV. JONES RECEIVED A TELEPHONE MESSAGE FROM THE VICTIM.NOTIFIED SGT FANSLER. 3/14/2006 1405HRS INV. JONES LEFT A MESSAGE TO MEET VICTIM AT HQ THAT EVENING. 3/14/2006 2230HRS INV. JONES RECEIVED A CALL FROM VICTIM'S FRIEND STATING SHE WAS UNABLE TO KEEP THE APPOINTMENT. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 3 3/15/2006 1640HRS: SGT. GOTTLIEB HAD TELEPHONE CONTACT WITH INV. B.S. JONES REFERENCE THE CASE ASSIGNMENT. INV. JONES ADVISED THAT SHE HAD AN APPOINTMNET 3/14/2006 WHICH THE VICTIM HAD TO RESCHEDULE. INV. JONES NOW ADVISED SHE SET UP A NEW APPOINTMENT WITH THE VICTIM FOR 7PM THIS EVENING. SHE ADVISED SGT. GOTTLIEB SHE WOULD CHECK WITH SGT. FANSLER CONCERNING THE ASSIGNMENT. The [non-]Victim was trying to retrieve her belongings. That is why she was going to go to the precinct. Then she was either too intoxicated or had an 'appointment' that conflicted with going to meet the cops.



nyesq83	Jul 2 2009, 08:29 AM Post #149
Posts: 517 Group: Members Member #239 Joined: Apr 29, 2008	SHE ADVISED SGT. GOTTLIEB SHE WOULD CHECK WITH SGT. FANSLER CONCERNING THE ASSIGNMENT. In other words, Gottlieb said "I'm gonna talk to CGM, I'm taking over. Go ahead, check with Fansler!"



Baldo	Jul 2 2009, 10:29 AM Post #150
Posts: 8,548 Group: Tier2 Member #45 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	When John in Carolina is up at bat expect fireworks. His latest round of work is magnificent. IMHO Gottlieb was a "plumber" a bad one! So who came first, the chicken or the egg? It doesn't make a difference. Senior DPD gave its acquiescence to give the Nifong control over the investigation it. In truth both Senior DPD & Nifong controlled it. Gottlieb did his job and shifted the blame over to "Ben's Operation, the rookie investigator" Gottlieb admitted they had too many briefings with Senior DPD Command level to remember. PS where are those notes? The DPD knew if Nifong had control there would be no retributions and they were safe. Indeed look at the reality. Three years after the intentional attempt to frame any member of the 2006 Lacrosse Team they are still safe. As for when did Nifong learn I suspect he knew much earlier. Another question for me is where did this clearly False charge get the support it needed to get going? Somebody green lighted it! Gottlieb was too smart to not have protection.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
9
10
11