| Blog and Media Roundup - Thursday, November 5, 2009; News Roundup | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 5 2009, 06:27 AM (147 Views) | |
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 06:27 AM Post #1 |
|
http://dukechronicle.com/article/layoffs-may-be-necessary-close-deficit Layoffs may be necessary to close deficit By Lindsey Rupp November 5, 2009 The University may be considering layoffs to help cut the $125 million deficit from its operating budget by the end of the 2011 fiscal year. Executive Vice President Tallman Trask said the administration will probably not initiate any more large-scale, personnel programs to address the deficit in the near future. It is now up to departments throughout the University to adjust their expenses to meet their smaller budgets, he said. Trask said for some of those units—from academic departments to administrative offices—meeting their smaller budget allocations could mean layoffs, particularly before fiscal year 2011. “I do think there will be some units that do have to reduce their workforces,” Trask said. “I wouldn’t at all be surprised if some start doing things in anticipation of [fiscal year 2011]. The sooner they can find those opportunities, the better off they’ll be.” Employees and their related expenses account for about two-thirds of the budget, he added. “I believe that what the University is attempting to do is to be very strategic and systematic in the way we’re trying to reduce the workforce—it’s clear that we do have to reduce the workforce and we’re trying to manage that,” said Kyle Cavanaugh, vice president for human resources. “It is likely that we’re not going to be able to avoid [layoffs] in total, but we are trying hard to avoid that in the large scale.” In April, Trask announced that Duke needs to shed about 1,000 jobs over two years. Provost Peter Lange agreed that if there were to be layoffs, they would be decentralized in individual units. The University has taken steps toward its 1,000-position goal and eliminated the equivalent of about 400 jobs through cutting vacated positions, reducing overtime hours and incentivizing 295 bi-weekly employees to retire, Trask said. He added that Duke has saved between $15 and $20 million through the programs. In addition, the University officials sent a retirement incentive package to 198 monthly salaried employees Oct. 16. Salaried employees have until Dec. 8 to accept or decline the package. Trask said he does not expect a high acceptance rate for the program because decisions will likely be based on individual financial situations. Rather than retiring to a steady pension plan like the bi-weekly early retirees, salaried retirees will receive one check. It is also difficult to predict how much the salaried incentive could save the University due in part to the range of salaries included in the offer, Trask said. The average salary is just under $70,000, but the pool ranges from the $40,000s to six-figure salaries. Cavanaugh said HR has been speaking with eligible employees frequently since the incentive was mailed out. The first group session that was held to answer general questions about the package was filled to standing-room only with employees and their families, he said. “I think that there’s general optimism, but the situation is still a significant challenge to all of us, so it’s going to impact different people differently,” Cavanaugh said. “So if you were one of the individuals who is contemplating the retirement initiative, that is a very personal decision and we are trying to position people as best we can to make good, informed decisions.” |
 |
 
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 06:29 AM Post #2 |
|
http://dukechronicle.com/node/150117/talk 7:16 AM November 5, 2009 Duke Duke and M... Fact Checker here. Good story, Chronicle. √ From what the newspaper reported, there may be as many as 600 layoffs. That's massive! The impact will be felt by dedicated employees, their families and the entire Durham region. It's a terrible situation. Point one - Fact Checker notes that on many occasions, Trask and his staff have assured us that they hoped to avoid lay-offs or to have only a minimal number. Today's statistics point to the need for massive layoffs, and indeed the execution is now being planned. You have to wonder how Trask and his staff could have been so far off in estimating where we'd be at this point. That's the hard question that must be put to him. Point two - Today's news involves only "the university" -- which is to say the educational and research functions. It does not embrace Duke Health, the hospitals and so forth, which have a separate stream of income from patients and a separate budget. From various, rather confusing and occluded reports, I gather that Duke in its entirety has about 43,000 employees but I cannot determine how many are on the "university" side and how many are at Duke Health. Thus, Fact Checker cannot state what percentage of people will be canned if 600 go. Point 3 -- Trask says the goal is to shed 1,000 total. He claims 400 so far. This 400 includes all the "low hanging fruit," in other words the easy harvest, with the rest being more difficult and painful. The 400 includes all the vacant jobs that won't be filled and a phony addition of "equivalent workers" based on cutting overtime. This device is often conjured up by managers who fail to meet their actual head-count targets. The 400 includes the people who took early retirement through the first incentive plan. The subtotal here is 295, but because of poor management, anyone who had attained a certain age and certain number of years service could seize the offer -- even if they were in a vital job. Trask has never shared with us the embarrassing, latest statistics on how many of the 295 had to be replaced. And at what cost. There is a second incentive plan afoot, sent to 198 workers who have until early next month to decide if they will retire. This plan involves people whose jobs Duke has ranked as dispensable -- tacitly admitting the defect in the first incentive plan, and also letting the 198 know they have a gun to their head to either retire or be among the first selected for layoff. No one knows how many people will say yes by early December; Trask and his staff have said maybe 10, maybe 20 and maybe 50, which shows these managers would be better off posting some numbers on the wall and throwing a dart blindfolded. Within Trask's department there is already an internal memo (subject of an earlier Fact Checker report) warning that Duke has so far enjoyed low rates in providing unemployment insurance, but that massive layoffs threaten to cost money in the form of higher premiums. Ouch ouch, on a hidden line in the annual budget. The Chronicle does not mention in today's report a third incentive plan (subject of an earlier Chronicle report) that is underway -- a plan that has only been vaguely revealed to offer senior professors incentive to retire by replacing the money they lost in their personal pension plans. Wow -- someone to guarantee your IRA investments! I am simply unable to take any wild guess on what this third incentive might cost. Let's say a professor has lost $250,000 from his retirement account -- which is entirely possible. How much is Duke going to replant? For how many people can you afford to do this? This golden door plan for professors is not a scheme to trim faculty, but rather to open up slots for new hires. Meaning Dear Old Duke is one of the few universities in the nation with the Help Wanted sign at the door. We may get some great faculty, but we also have to worry about our ability to sustain these expenses for decades ahead. Fact Checker notes that Duke lists 2,877 regular rank faculty as of June 30, 2009. Five years earlier, it was 2,477 and ten years earlier it was 2,159. At some future point, I shall explore what the hell they all do. Readers who do not want to get drunk but who nonetheless want to send their heads spinning should try to decipher and reconcile some of Duke's financial reports. For example today the Chronicle says that employees account for 2/3rds of Duke's expenses. But in Trask's annual report "salaries and benefits totaled $1.2 billion, representing 57% of total operating expenses." These statistics are from page 5 of his printed report, page 3 of the PDF version, one more way to insure that it's difficult to find them or to cite them. There is a neat pie chart cut into pieces showing that 46 percent is salary and 11 percent fringe benefits. If you do not like those figures, go to page 36 of the printed version, page 34 of the PDF, and you will find these: total salary and wages $1,772,762 with fringe benefits amounting to 18.2 percent. These are not just numbers that I am trifling with. The difference between 2/3rds and 57 percent is huge. The difference between fringe benefits worth 11 percent and 18.2 percent is huge. At this point in time, these numbers are the life and future of Duke, and all of us should have access to clear understandable information about a crisis affecting the place we love. Students should particularly demand this; after all our President has admirably commissioned them not only to study here, but to help invent Duke's future, a process that can only proceed from information and transparency. Finally, we should all also demand that the website http://www.duke.edu/economy/ set up to keep us informed be kept up to date. The Brodhead administration should be ashamed of itself for the state of this tool that it created only months ago. This site should include information that would let each of us calculate how much has been saved -- for Fact Checker has difficulties with official figures as we aim toward a budget in 2011 that will be $125 million less than the 2007-08 budget. Well that was the goal, clearly stated, until some officials started to smudge it. Thank you so much for reading Fact Finder today. √ |
|
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 06:31 AM Post #3 |
|
http://www.heraldsun.com/pages/full_story_news_durham/push?article-Move+clears+way+for+new+courthouse%20&id=4327451-Move+clears+way+for+new+courthouse&instance=main_article Move clears way for new courthouse 11.04.09 - 11:15 pm Funeral home relocates to temporary quarters By Ray Gronberg gronberg@heraldsun.com; 419-6648 DURHAM -- The Scarborough & Hargett Funeral Home has moved to temporary quarters, clearing the way for county officials to demolish its former building on Roxboro Street to make room for a new courthouse. The move began over the weekend, in conjunction with the end of the temporary lease the county had granted the Scarborough family for continued use of the Roxboro Street building. Scarborough & Hargett is now operating out of the Carolina Times building at 923 Old Fayetteville St. County officials, meanwhile, got ready to send the courthouse project out to bids. County Engineer Glen Whisler said early this week that nine companies had qualified to bid on the project and would receive copies of the blueprints. The county bought the Roxboro Street building from Scarborough & Hargett in 2006 for $3.6 million. Elected officials had previously authorized administrators to initiate an eminent domain taking from the firm, owned by Queen and J.C. "Skeepie" Scarborough. The funeral home's long-term plan has been to move to a site off the Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway in the UDI Industrial Park. But construction there stalled a year ago and hasn't resumed. J.C. Scarborough couldn't be reached for comment, but UDI President Ed Stewart said the funeral home owner has assured him "they were going to get back on the development of [the new building] any day now." Stewart added, however, that he hasn't been given an exact start date. "I wish I had one," he said. The Scarboroughs had asked the county for another month on Roxboro Street, but over the summer County Manager Mike Ruffin and his staff held firm on the Oct. 31 deadline. They said they wanted to get the courthouse out to bid this fall to take advantage of the low prices builders are offering amid the recession. County officials agreed this week that the new courthouse will in fact be formally named the Durham County Courthouse. The building may include a large photo display honoring the former courthouse on Main Street that now houses county offices. The naming decision was one of several construction-related issues County Commissioners addressed this week. They also gave designers of the new human-services building now rising on Main Street the green light to etch into the structure's glass entry a motto summarizing its mission. It will read, "Durham's vitality is built upon the health of our community to foster and enhance the wellbeing of every citizen." Commissioners also went along with the county library's plan to commission a sculpture from Raleigh artist Thomas Sayre to place outside the new South Regional Library going up near the corner of South Alston Avenue and N.C. 54. The sculpture, paid for with a $50,000 private donation, will stand about 17 feet tall and be a stack of concrete slabs arranged to resemble a log-built farm building. Sayre said the design is supposed to honor the history of the Lowe's Grove area, and was cleared by the library's designers from the Durham-based Freelon Group. The Freelon Group also designed the human services building. Another Durham company, O'Brien/Atkins Associates, is handling the design of the courthouse. |
|
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 06:34 AM Post #4 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/175633.html Published Thu, Nov 05, 2009 02:00 AM Modified Thu, Nov 05, 2009 05:05 AM N.C. has 2 up for Court of Appeals WASHINGTON The nomination of two North Carolina judges to the nation's second-highest court could further a leftward push by President Barack Obama in shaping the federal judicial system. The confirmations also would give North Carolina the sort of heft on the court sought for years by the state's legal community and its senators in Washington. North Carolina now has just one member on the 15-judge panel, which hears cases from five mid-Atlantic states. Judges Jim Wynn of Cary and Albert Diaz of Charlotte were nominated by Obama on Wednesday to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. If confirmed, they would bring the number of North Carolina seats to three. Diaz would be a historic appointment as the first Latino member of the 4th Circuit. He now specializes in complex business cases in the Mecklenburg County Superior Court. Wynn, who sits on the N.C. Court of Appeals, is entering his second confirmation process. Former President Bill Clinton nominated Wynn in 1999 to the same court, but that was blocked by then-U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms. Both were rated well qualified by the American Bar Association, and both are experienced civil judges who also served years in the military justice system. Diaz worked in several legal roles during his career in the U.S. Navy. Wynn remains a captain in the U.S. Navy Reserves and is a certified military trial judge. "They've spent a lifetime training for these positions," said Burley Mitchell, a Democrat and former chief justice of the N.C. Supreme Court. Wynn and Diaz might help tilt what has been known as the nation's most conservative appeals court, legal experts say. Along with Wynn and Diaz, the Senate is considering two other nominees from Virginia and Maryland. The confirmation of all four Obama nominees could impact the 4th Circuit's makeup, both in diversity and ideology. "It means that for many years what was one of the most conservative circuits in the country would move most substantially in the liberal direction," said Arthur Hellman, a law professor and appellate court expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Curt Levey, executive director of the conservative Committee for Justice, a Washington judicial advocacy group, said Obama "sees an opportunity to shift what was a conservative circuit to be now a quite liberal circuit." No cakewalk Levey has urged Republican senators to keep in mind the past treatment of Bush nominees as they consider Diaz and Wynn. "I will predict ... that life will not be made easy for these two nominees," he said. For Wynn and Diaz, the next step would be confirmation hearings before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. Hellman said they can expect questions on issues such as abortion rights, criminal law and environmental regulation. But the 4th Circuit also has heard many terrorism cases, Hellman said. Their military backgrounds might ease the concerns of some GOP senators about their understanding of national security, he said. Appeals courts play a critical role in the federal judiciary. The U.S. Supreme Court takes so few cases among those petitioned that the appeals courts end up as the final decision-makers in nearly all the cases that come before them. North Carolina has traditionally had two seats on the 15-member panel, with one now vacant. If Wynn and Diaz are confirmed, South Carolina would lose one of its four seats in exchange. Although states within the circuit grumble about whether they get their fair share of judges on the court, the judges' home addresses have little impact. "It doesn't matter as far as 99 percent of the issues," Mitchell said, though he supports North Carolina getting proportional representation. A lone Tar Heel For years, the state has had just one member on the 4th Circuit: Allyson Duncan of Durham, nominated by President George W. Bush in 2003. Another Bush nominee, U.S. District Court Judge Terrence Boyle of Edenton, languished for years before the White House eventually withdrew his name. That seat has been open since the early 1990s. U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan, a Greensboro Democrat, called the two nominations "a victory for North Carolina." "For too long partisan bickering and obstructionism on both sides of the aisle have unnecessarily derailed the nominations of qualified North Carolinians," Hagan said. And much depends on the views of Republican U.S. Sen. Richard Burr of Winston-Salem. Opposition from him could potentially scuttle the confirmations of either Diaz or Wynn, Hellman said. Burr praised the judges' experience, their distinguished backgrounds and their military service. He didn't, however, say how he would cast his vote. Staff writer Michael Biesecker contributed to this report. bbarrett@mcclatchydc.com or 202-383-0012 |
|
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 06:35 AM Post #5 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/state/story/175629.html Published Thu, Nov 05, 2009 04:56 AM Modified Thu, Nov 05, 2009 04:59 AM Senate majority leader to quit RALEIGH Senate Majority Leader Tony Rand, one of North Carolina's most powerful and colorful lawmakers, announced Wednesday that he is resigning from the legislature. The surprise move will end an unprecedented stretch in which the team of Rand and Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight ran the state Senate and, some would argue, the state itself. Rand, a Fayetteville Democrat, had a hand in virtually every major piece of legislation that passed during the past decade, from the establishment of a state lottery to the flow of money to the state's highways and universities. Rand, a lawyer, accepted Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue's appointment as chairman of the state parole board. He said his resignation would take effect by the end of the year, but did not set a date. Rand had mastered the arcane ways of the legislature over the course of 22 years in the Senate, and clearly relished the opportunity to confront and confound his opponents in private meetings and public debates. "Tony plays for keeps," said Sen. David Hoyle, a Gaston County Democrat. "He's a master of the game. He's a great ally when he's on the same page on a bill, and a tough opponent when he's not." Sen. Tom Apodaca, a Republican from Hendersonville who is a close friend to Rand, said Basnight decided where the trains would go and Rand kept them on schedule. It was not immediately clear Wednesday who might step in to fill his role in the Senate. "I don't know if in my lifetime we'll ever see another team like that," Apodaca said. "And maybe we don't need to. When you've been there too long, power sort of centralizes. The longer you're there, the more political capital you collect and spend." Rand turned 70 in September and, noting that his father died at the same age, said new challenges appeal to him. "There comes a time when it's time to go," Rand said. Fellow senators have routinely speculated in recent months over whether Basnight would leave the Senate because of a slowly progressing neurological disorder, but Rand's sudden departure fit with his history of keeping opponents guessing his next move and, in this case, wondering why. Flanked from the left A leftward shift in the Democratic caucus that controls the Senate made his role as majority leader more difficult. A growing coalition of more liberal Democrats in the Senate helped push through laws this year that allow more comprehensive sex education, specifically protect gay students from bullying and allow death penalty challenges based on race. "Sen. Rand increasingly found his views at odds with his more liberal Democratic colleagues, and that may have led to this decision," said Senate Republican Leader Phil Berger of Eden. Rand served as Basnight's enforcer. He engineered the lottery's passage after years of futility, shepherded a massive bond package for university construction, helped line up key appointments and took the front line in contentious battles such as shoring up the state health plan. The state Real Estate Commission dedicated its office building to him. "I am confident that I speak for the entire Senate," Basnight said in a prepared statement, "when I say that his service and expertise in this institution are unmatched and unlikely to ever be." Basnight and Rand over the years built a fundraising system that raised hundreds of thousands of dollars. They did not need the money for their own re-election in safely Democratic districts but used it instead to support other Democratic legislative candidates in an ongoing effort to increase their majority in the Senate. Rand would quickly unholster the rules and procedures of the Senate to shut down an opponent. After Basnight's election as president pro tem this year, Rand used a parliamentary maneuver to ensure that the vote could never be recalled. Many Republicans and even some Democrats regarded Rand with suspicion because of his role as minister of discipline. "Every organization has got to have somebody who has to take the heat for a decision, and Tony has been that person," Hoyle said. "He has been the one who delivered the bad news and got the blame for things that were not of his making. Don't kill the messenger, but I think some people would like to have killed the messenger." A quick and gravelly wit Rand's image was softened by a quick wit delivered in his gravelly baritone with sweeping hand gestures that prompted some to dub him the Foghorn Leghorn of the Senate. A devoted UNC fan, he traveled to championship games and rarely missed an opportunity to poke other schools. During a committee presentation on entrepreneurship programs, lawmakers were told of a ranking in which Western Carolina was first, UNC took second and Harvard came in third. "Exceptionally fine showing for Harvard," Rand said. Rand's new job as parole board chairman is a full-time post with a $100,000 salary. The commission releases inmates who have met eligibility requirements, sets rules for parolees and advises the governor on clemency. "If you happen to find yourself serving active time," he said at the end of an interview, "you come see me." News researcher Brooke Cain contributed to this report. mjohnson@charlotteobserver.com or 919-829-4774 |
|
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 06:38 AM Post #6 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/counties/durham_county/story/174158.html Published Wed, Nov 04, 2009 08:40 AM Modified Wed, Nov 04, 2009 08:41 AM Bell, council incumbents win DURHAM With 84 percent of votes counted, Mayor Bill Bell and three incumbentCity Council members were well on their way to landslide re-elections. Returns from 49 of thecity's 58 precincts showed Bell leading challenger Steven L. Williams 77 percent to 22percent, with a handful of write-in votes. Council members Cora Cole-McFadden, Howard Clement and Mike Woodard each had more than 70 percent. The results culminated an election season that most citizens apparently were content to let pass them by. Turnout was light at precincts across the city, though better than the 4.36 percent who turned out for the Oct.6 primary. Several precincts had passed their total primary totals by midafternoon. For those who did turn out, voting went off without a hitch, Elections Director Mike Ashe said: "Democracy is having a great day." Bell's opponent, Steven L. Williams, initially set out to run against Bell for mayor in 2005 but withdrew before the election. Donald Hughes, opposing Cole-McFadden for the Ward 1 seat; Matt Drew, facing Clement in Ward 2; and Allan Polak, opposing Woodard in Ward 3, were making their first bids for elective office. Throughout the campaign, the incumbents emphasized their experience and accomplishments, such as Durham's downtown revitalization, projects to revive depressed neighborhoods and attention to the city's decayed water and sewer lines and potholed streets. Bell and Cole-McFadden have held their positions since 2001. Woodard was first elected in 2005. Clement is the longest-serving council member in Durham history, with 26 years. The newcomers challenged the city's status quo, but from different perspectives. Williams and Hughes emphasized inclusiveness and attention to the city's poor. Drew called for fiscal responsibility and restraint, and Polak stressed his business experience as owner of a small IT firm. jim.wise@newsobserver.com or 919-932-2004 |
|
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 06:39 AM Post #7 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/static/content/elections/election2009/general/durham.html Durham Election Summary Click on the header for each race to see results by precinct. |
|
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 07:42 AM Post #8 |
|
http://justice4nifong.blogspot.com/2009/11/wral-prime-example-of-media-molding.html Monday, November 2, 2009 WRAL… Prime example of the Media molding minds of the public “Walt in Durham,” the pseudonym of a frequent commenter in this blog site, www.justice4nifong.blogspot.com, is an intelligent individual, but even he has been duped and bamboozled by the media… WRAL, in particular. If the media is capable of feeding misinformation to Walt, and having him accept it as truthful, then it is obvious why the vast majority of media subscribers, like Walt, have negative attitudes towards former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong which are unwarranted. This observation stems from a recent blog (around October 18, 2009) in which I made the following statement, “Just because Attorney General Roy Cooper said nothing happened at the party does not make it so.” Walt replied with a comment on October 21, 2009 which stated as follows: “But, Nifong himself said so twice” (insinuating that Mr. Nifong admitted that nothing happened at the Duke lacrosse party). When I requested the source upon which he based his comment, he told me it was from WRAL. And sure enough, I went to the WRAL website and upon searching, I found the following article posted on July 26, 2007, with the headline, “Nifong Apologizes, Admits Nothing Happened.” That headline is an outright blatantly false and purposely misleading statement, and it was extremely effective in playing a Jedi-mind trick on Walt, and many others. The first part of the statement, “Nifong Apologizes,” is true, but the second part, “Admits Nothing Happened,” is offensively false on its face and baseless. There is absolutely nothing in the web article to substantiate such a claim. Mr. Nifong does make the following statement, as published in the article: “I agree with the Attorney General’s statement that there is no credible evidence that Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty, and Mr. Evans committed any crimes for which they were indicted – or any any other crimes against Ms. Mangum – during the party.” Yes, he states that “there is no credible evidence” that the three defendants committed any crimes for which they were indicted, but that does not mean that he does not believe that they are not guilty of committing crimes against Ms. Mangum. Definitely it does not mean that Mr. Nifong believed that “nothing happened.” For the media to state that Mr. Nifong admitted that nothing happened is wrong and grossly irresponsible. That said, there are many cases that move forward without credible evidence. In the Brittany Willis murder/rape/kidnapping/armed robbery case, there was no credible evidence against defendant James Arthur Johnson. Although Johnson heroically solved the crime for the Wilson police, he ended up spending 39 months in jail on charges which lacked credible evidence; charges that were later dropped. Notice that the media did not go after Prosecutor Bill Wolfe. In the case against 14 year old Erick Daniels, who was identified by a robbery victim due to the shape of his eyebrows in a school yearbook, there was no credible evidence that existed against him. Yet he wrongfully served seven years in jail and the media is not critical of his prosecutor, Freda Black. There was no credible evidence against Alan Gell for the murder with which he was convicted and unjustly served nine years in prison (half of it on death row). However, there was exculpatory evidence favoring Mr. Gell which the prosecutors withheld from defense attorneys in order to win a conviction. Even at that, the media went out of its way to protect and shield his prosecutor (David Hoke) from criticism. I could go on. Bottom line is that there are many charges that are brought by prosecutors without credible evidence… but just circumstantial evidence. The admission by Mr. Nifong that no credible evidence existed does not necessarily exclude the possibility that a credible case could be built against the defendants. Finally, the nexus between credible evidence and the occurrence of a sexual assault is non-existent, but WRAL and the media in general would like the public to believe that in this particular Duke Lacrosse case they are linked; one and the same. The folly of this argument is obvious when you consider, for example, the rape case against Ronald Cotton. Mr. Cotton was picked up off the street and placed in a lineup where he was positively identified as the rapist by a rape victim. There was no credible evidence linking him to the crime, nonetheless he was convicted and served many years in prison before being cleared by DNA. Because no credible evidence against him existed does not mean that the rape for which he was charged did not happen. In the Duke Lacrosse case, Attorney General Cooper has reached far beyond his bounds by declaring that no criminal activity took place against Ms. Mangum, based on the fact that there was no “credible” evidence against those accused by Ms. Mangum. And this is the line that the media, including WRAL, pursued and propagated. Furthermore, the media, instead of questioning the legitimacy and propriety of the attorney general’s “innocent” proclamation of the three Duke Lacrosse defendants, accepted it as being legitimate and binding. This declaration is an example of overreaching and irresponsibility by the attorney general at its greatest, and the media has been content to completely ignore its lack of legal substance. This is an outrage that WRAL reported without question and as factual with its online statement: “Following North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper’s declaration this April that the three men were innocent, …” A final disgracefully misleading passage in the WRAL article is: “The defense’s request to drop the motion for criminal sanctions means that Nifong will no longer be required to reimburse the defendants thousands of dollars for costs incurred in the defense’s uncovering of exculpatory DNA evidence that could have cleared the players had the case gone to trial.” First of all, the defense probably decided to drop the motion for criminal sanctions because of the absurdity of the charge, which would become apparent in a courtroom. To expect a prosecutor to pay for work performed by the defense team is absolutely ludicrous, yet the media’s take on it is matter-of-fact. But the most egregious and disingenuous part of the statement is the use of the adjective “exculpatory” when describing DNA evidence. There is absolutely no way in which the referenced DNA evidence could be exculpatory (that is, clear the players of sexual assault), and to suggest so is a monumental disservice to the public. WRAL, along with almost all other media sources, has consistently erred on this specific issue of great importance. In reporting on the same event, John Stevenson, of The Herald Sun, makes statements similar to WRAL such as: “All remaining charges against the defendants were dismissed in April by Attorney General Roy Cooper, who declared the three innocent,…” The Herald Sun goes out of its way to generate sympathy for the Duke defendants by quoting one of their attorneys, Joseph Cheshire: “…a long journey of suffering for innocent people.” Mr. Cheshire takes advantage of Attorney General Cooper’s “innocent” declaration, and then the public is supposed to believe that the Duke Lacrosse players suffered? First, they spent no time in jail (their prosecutor – Mike Nifong – spent more time in jail than they did combined). Second, they each received $7 million from Duke University in an out of court settlement (don’t ask me why). Third, their avaricious carpetbagger families are currently trying to gouge another $10 million for each of their defendant sons from the cash-strapped city of Durham. Fourth, they were represented by high-powered attorney, not public defenders. And fifth, they were certainly not oblivious to the biased media attacks being lodged against Mike Nifong, the accuser, and the city of Durham. With consideration of the aforementioned, I doubt very seriously that the boys endured a “long journey of suffering.” James Arthur Johnson, Erick Daniels, Floyd Brown, Charles Wayne Munsey, Theodore Jerry Williams, and other innocent people who were wrongfully incarcerated for long periods of time without compensation know what it is to suffer. On the other hand, the Duke Lacrosse defendants have mainly experienced pampering and coddling by the courts, the media, and the public… privileged treatment for which they have been accustomed and to which they feel is their birthright. As outrageous and unfair as the coverage by WRAL and The Herald Sun was, it pales in comparison to the ranting of MSNBC Senior legal analyst Susan F. Filan. In an online article posted June 17, 2007, titled “Nifong’s punishment is extreme, appropriate,” Ms. Filan claims that Mr. Nifong damaged the sport of lacrosse. Now, I am not making this up. She actually wrote that! I would like to know how. First of all, I doubt that he even knows anything about the sport. Another unsubstantiated claim by Ms. Filan is that Mr. Nifong damaged the reputation of Duke University. Again, I would like to know how. Her article failed to explain. Ms. Filan claims Mr. Nifong damaged three innocent men. Like the rest of the media, she gives credence to Attorney General Roy Cooper’s “innocent” declaration. Now I have never attended law school, and I am certainly not the senior legal analyst of a major media network, but from my high school civics class I learned that the attorney general, or anyone else in the executive branch, does not have the authority to render judicial decisions. That authority lies clearly with the judicial branch of government, as in judges. Finally, Ms. Filan blames Mr. Nifong for damaging the public’s confidence in the criminal justice system. Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. Mr. Nifong, in prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse case on behalf of a victim who was poor, disenfranchised, and of color, against three young college men from families of wealth and privilege, was following the principle of “equal justice for all.” North Carolina justice, in practice, follows the tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.” That is what prevailed in the Duke Lacrosse case. The powers that be, and the media (including Ms. Filan) which was in cahoots with those powers, are responsible for destroying the public’s faith in the criminal justice system of North Carolina. All one has to do is look at the cases of James Arthur Johnson, Erick Daniels, Floyd Brown, Theodore Jerry Williams, Wayne Charles Munsey, Darryl Hunt, and many others who are poor and disenfranchised, and then compare them with the Duke Lacrosse case. I take umbrage at Ms. Filan’s baseless speculations, especially her following statement: “He used the Duke case to get re-elected, and he resigned to try to save his law license.” What proof does she have for making these claims? They are reckless, inflammatory comments that are unsubstantiated… definitely statements which I doubt that she can back up with fact. Ms. Filan did note in her article the rarity of the disbarment of an attorney, stating that it is the legal equivalent of a unicorn sighting. I would disagree when it comes to attorneys in private practice, but the statement is valid when it comes to state prosecutors. She failed to mention that Mike Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar since its inception in 1933. During a 76 year period, hundreds, if not thousands of North Carolina attorneys have lost their law license, but only one prosecutor has been disbarred… Mike Nifong. This is a fact that the media has kept hidden from the public, especially in light of North Carolina cases in which there has been egregious prosecutorial misconduct… in particular the Alan Gell case. Furthermore, North Carolina follows only the states of Illinois and Louisiana in the number of death row inmates who have been exonerated. This type of Journalism engaged in by WRAL, The Herald Sun, MSNBC and other media outlets is detrimental to the public which relies on the media for fair and objective reporting. The false, fraudulent, unsubstantiated statements and claims put forth by the media about Mr. Nifong are not the result of sloppiness or inattention, but they are carefully calculated statements made as propaganda intended to direct public sentiment against Mr. Nifong who has attempted to take class and color out of the equation when it comes to justice in North Carolina. Mr. Nifong has always maintained that he felt that something criminal did happen to the accuser at the March 13, 2006 party hosted by the Duke Lacrosse team. Unlike Attorney General Roy Cooper, Mr. Nifong never said “nothing happened” at the party. So, the media took it upon itself to do it for him… even though there was no truth to it. And as a result, intelligent people, like Walt in Durham, believed the lie… proving that the media has become quite adroit at using the Jedi-mind trick on the public. That is what the media did in its coverage of the Duke Lacrosse case and its prosecutor, Mike Nifong – instead of informing the people, it was busy molding their minds. |
|
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 07:49 AM Post #9 |
|
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/amen_other_bigots_gutsy_dolan_now_X8Ovz3fQ8QrKV6jeZAR3JL Updated: Thu., Nov. 5, 2009, 4:39 AM home Amen to the gutsy Dolan - now fight back vs. the other lib bigots By ANDREA PEYSER Last Updated: 4:39 AM, November 5, 2009 Posted: 3:30 AM, November 5, 2009 New Yorks archbishop has got the score only half-right. Bigotry is alive and well -- and it goes far beyond the Catholic Church. When Comptroller and failed mayoral candidate Bill Thompson this week heard a slur spat against Jews on a radio show, his reaction rang out loud and clear into the wilderness: He greeted the bigoted caller with total silence. When actress and social nitwit Janeane Garofalo was asked about tax protesters, she slimed thousands of white Americans as racist "rednecks" -- with brain damage. Again, the reaction was plain: Near total silence. When David Letterman compared Sarah Palin to a stewardess, and trashed her teenage daughter as some kind of slut, I don't have to tell you what happened. And when The New York Times shows its biased hand, routinely going after -- you name it -- American troops or evil Republicans, the paper wins accolades when it should apologize. Archbishop Timothy Dolan has had enough. Denied a space in the paper to counter what he called "the national pastime" of Catholic-bashing, the archbishop wrote passionately online about anti-religious fervor that reeks off the pages of the Newspaper of Record. Particularly as practiced by fire-breathing columnist Maureen Dowd, whose recent column punked bishops and priests, and even took a shot at Pope Benedict XVI for his natty footwear. Insane. Dolan compared the practice to "the anti-Semitism of the left." How I wish we had more Dolans out there, of all faiths. I say he got the score only half-right because, as a leader of the much-maligned Catholics, Dolan fails to address the racism and anti-religious fervor that's aimed like a laser beyond the church. In the halls of Hollywood, as well as on the pages of the Times, and even in the local classroom, libels are produced on an almost daily basis against Jews, women, conservatives. And, most angrily, at white males. We are expected to laugh. A Times reporter found alone in a bar might tell you that the reverse racism is justified by the belief that these groups wield disproportionate power. That is why the paper thinks nothing of slamming white males, such as the innocent Duke lacrosse players accused unjustly of raping a black woman. But decades of anti-male bigotry has yielded some alarming results. Boys today are 30 percent more likely than girls to flunk or drop out of school. Girls outperform boys in all grades, and young males are more likely to be diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. That's according to no less an authority than the National Center for Educational Statistics. Thompson, when caught engaging in silent bigotry against Jews, attempted to change the subject. His people claimed Mayor Bloomberg was himself a racist by failing to slam Rudy Giuliani for making the demonstrably true claim that crime used to be a lot worse in this city. We've grown so afraid of our shadows, we're not supposed to state the obvious. The last acceptable form of prejudice goes far beyond the pulpit. It is unacceptable. |
|
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 07:51 AM Post #10 |
|
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/ Thursday, November 5, 2009 University rape claim withdrawn It would be nice to see news reports dig a little and find out why the retraction occurred. But a guess would be regret over a consensual encounter. And notice the description of the attacker in the last sentence. As multiple stories have shown, the more vague the description, the more likely it is to be false. (But, note that some of the great rape liars concoct stories with incredible detail -- to the point that police actually comment how believable she was.) 2nd rape claim withdrawn at University. Police investigating two allegations of rape at a university on the same night have said the latest complaint has been withdrawn. Officers said that following inquiries into the rape of a 20-year-old woman at the University of Glamorgan, in Pontypridd, South Wales, they were no longer looking for suspects. South Wales Police are still investigating the rape of an 18-year-old student on the campus, which happened on September 26. A force spokeswoman said: "In relation to the alleged rape of a 20-year-old woman at the University of Glamorgan, South Wales Police can confirm that following inquiries we are no longer looking for suspects and the complaint has been withdrawn. "Police are no longer investigating this incident. "An officer has been assigned as a point of contact for the woman and is offering her support for unrelated matters." Since the rape of the teenager last month, police have launched a series of high-visibility patrols at the university. Officers were approached by the 20-year-old victim during a patrol on Monday when she reported that she had been raped by up to three men on the same night the 18-year-old was attacked. Police were first called to the campus at around 4.50am on September 26 after a report that the teenage non-residential student had been sexually assaulted at knifepoint in a friend's room. Officers are still hunting a 6ft hooded man who wore gloves in connection with that incident. Thanks to AFOR. Link: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5g5ovNsNJbm0mjcCabDG2nQ8tdHVQ |
|
|
|
| Quasimodo | Nov 5 2009, 07:54 AM Post #11 |
|
Yes, and if any are fired, you can bet it won't be the recent hires for the new angry studies departments, but probably from classical studies, English lit., Latin, American history, etc. |
|
|
| abb | Nov 5 2009, 07:55 AM Post #12 |
|
http://www.smashsouthsports.org/forums/showthread.php?t=23117 What you all need to know regarding the Davidson Trial I have not posted here in some time. I have been very busy in many ways. I have sent this email to this close to me only. This trial CHANGED my life in many ways. You all recognize me as a cocky, smart-ass bastard. The Bottom-Line is that we NEVER, EVER know when and where we will leave this earth. THAT was the PAINFUL YET HONEST MESSAGE I took from my civil duty... When I was first summoned to court at the end of August, I felt that I was picked for a reason. At that point, without even answering the first question of more than 120 that we had to initially do, I felt like my semi-ignorance to the issues involving the case were a part of why I was there. I simply answered honestly and was brought back for another round of questioning. Ultimately, I do not feel like I was "chosen" for jury duty: I feel like I was part of a group that was meant to be together, as we all felt after just a very, very short time together. There was a mixture on the jury: Conservative, Liberal, Male, Female, Black, White, Religious, Non-religious, Old, Young, Rich, Poor. I am not sure if it was fate or good judgment, but both attorneys nailed it regarding a jury that meshed. We had viewpoints from every angle of life. For almost 2 weeks, we were isolated but very well taken care of. The county did a very good job of NOT jeopardizing the case in any way while respecting our needs/lives. At no point did we feel threatened in any way EXCEPT for when we arrived back at our hotel after our verdict to see a TV reporter with a microphone and a cameraman. They were quickly dispersed We listened for almost 2 weeks to every single angle of testimony that exists. For those that haven't seen the evidence in this case, it's absolutely overwhelming regarding Davidson's involvement. Davidson/his accomplices ended up at Washington Ridge Apartments on that night to see Ethel Freeman, a woman Davidson owed money to for furniture she'd let him have. He met her through her son. She agreed to let him take some of it upon the belief that he would pay her back once every 2 weeks. According to Ethel, KUB contacted her on the Friday before Chris and Channon were abducted to tell her they would turn her power off that coming Monday IF she didn't have their money to them by that day. That is how and why Davidson and his accomplices ended up seeing Chris and Channon: They had traveled there to pay that debt. Chris and Channon were in the wrong place at the wrong time. They car-jacked Chris and Channon at that point. This was around 9:30. We don't know for sure. They took them back to Chipman Street. What we do know: - Channon called her father at 12:33 AM to tell him everything was ok and that they would be home in a couple hours. At this point, they had been kidnapped and Chris had been raped. We know he had been raped by the amount of neutrophils presents in the area that was torn. He was raped around 2 hours before he was shot, which was 1:45 AM. - Chris was first shot in the lower back, which paralyzed him as it severed his spinal cord. Then he was shot in the shoulder. He was then finished off execution-style. He walked there barefoot, pants removed, feet bound with his own belt, mount gagged with his socks. His hands and feet were tied with fabric from Davidson's home. He was left there, dead. - After Chris was shot dead at 1:45, Davidson made a phone call to a friend of his girlfriend, Daphne Sutton, from Chris's PHONE at 2:00, hoping she wouldn't recognize the number, as she'd ignored his calls that day. - Channon Christian was RAPED at least once between 2:00 and around 5:00 AM, when SOMEONE went BACK to the train tracks to set Chris's body on FIRE to conceal evidence. - Channon Christian died sometime between the middle of the day on Sunday and Monday. The medical examiner could only isolate it to 24 hours. Channon Christian died with her eyes OPEN. She suffocated to death. Davidson's handprints were on the 3 outermost bags of 5 she was put in. Why she was left in a trashcan on Chipman Street we will never know. Maybe Davidson thought those that fled to Kentucky were going to dispose of her body? Maybe they meant to place that trash can on their street somewhere for Waste Industries to pick up, mixing it with the rest of the trash cans? When we went back for initial deliberation on the 45 counts the state presented, we deliberated for around 8 hours. We spent about half of those on whether or not Davidson was responsible for Chris Newsom's rape. I believed, as did all the men on the jury, that he was criminally responsible, as he had a chance to take action at any point before that to stop it from happening and did not. The women on the jury did not feel so, as they didn't want to/could not place that blame on him, as they felt he could not have known that Chris would be raped, believing that he wasn't there. My argument was that, if we can convict Davidson on the Murder of Chris Newsom without knowing he was there, how could we not believe he knew about/was responsible for the rape? I/we were right, but, ultimately, we conceded on this count. It hurt me badly to not hold Davidson responsible for the TORTURE of Chris Newsom on this count, but that is exactly what we did. When we got to the charges of Murder for Davidson in this phase, it took us about 20 minutes to run through the 16 charges. There were no objections. There were no questions. There was no doubt. We all believed beyond any shadow of any doubt that he was guilty for both murders and all underlying actions. We went back to court on Thursday fully prepared to give a decision of Death or Life in Prison. We went to bed on Wednesday night with that on our minds and hearts. None of us slept well. We were disappointed when Judge B told us on Thursday around 4 that we would need to come back the next day. We had voted and we were prepared to stay until midnight to reach a verdict. We did not want to go back to our hotel and think about that another night. When we arrived at the Courthouse on Friday, before (and after) hearing closing arguments, we were split 8-4 as to Davidson's fate. Eight of us believed he should receive death. Four of us were not sure. We did as we were instructed to do, voting on Aggravating factors vs. Mitigating factors. The aggravating factors were overwhelming BUT we are all human: Our jury had mothers and sisters. Out of the 5+ hours we deliberated, about 4 of them were spent in prayer and in reading the Bible and reaching the Moral Certainty called for by Law. This was the deciding and ultimate factor in our decision. We obeyed both God's law and Man's law. When we layed out our arguments for or against death, mine were: - Davidson had 2 C's: Choice and Chance. This man had MORE chances than his siblings that DIDN'T become killers/rapists. And he had a CHOICE. The "psychiatrist" Peter Brown laid out 8 factors for us that he made sound INEVITABLE that Davidson would become a violent offender. Out of those 8, guess who had, without question, 4 of them? President Barack Obama. - A death sentence to him is MORE MERCIFUL than what he gave those he killed. He will NOT be tortured. He will get say say goodbye to his family. - He should have to live each and every day knowing that what he did to those 2 young adults will lead to his death. The thought of them every single day and what happened to them is exactly what he left for their family. We, the Jury, absolutely did the right thing in this case. It was the hardest thing I believe any of us have ever done, but we held true to each other and to justice. There are NO WINNERS in this incident. It's all sad and unfortunate, for all sides involved. We only hope that our doing what Tennessee State Law asked us to will lead to another step towards some sort of closure for all of those involved. |
|
|
|
| Quasimodo | Nov 5 2009, 07:57 AM Post #13 |
|
How are the trustees, who live hundreds (or thousands--as in China) supposed to be able to know which figure are correct? How are these figures presented to them? What sort of analysis is given to them during their two-day retreats? Or do they just rubber-stamp what the executive committee gives them? |
|
|
|
| nyesq83 | Nov 5 2009, 01:51 PM Post #14 |
|
And now we know why they rammed through granting of Department status for AAAS as quickly as they did. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |
7:18 AM Nov 27
