| Wade Smith and Jim Cooney; are Edwards lawyers.... | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 29 2010, 05:50 PM (5,215 Views) | |
| brittany | Feb 3 2010, 11:09 PM Post #151 |
|
So what's the big deal about making a donation to Edwards. Wasn't he the former Senator from NC? Donations was lst Q. 2007. What was happening then? From Wiki: On January 13, 2007 Attorney General Roy Cooper announced that his office would take over the case.[59] On January 24, 2007, the North Carolina State Bar filed a second round of ethics charges against Nifong for a systematic abuse of prosecutorial discretion that was prejudicial to the administration of justice when he withheld DNA evidence to mislead the court.[60] Wikinews has related news: Charges dropped in Duke lacrosse rape case On April 11, 2007, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper announced at a press conference that he had dismissed all charges against the three lacrosse players.[61] He not only dismissed the charges but he took the unusual step of declaring the accused players innocent.[62] Cooper also announced that Mangum would not be prosecuted, stating that investigators and attorneys that had interviewed her thought "she may actually believe the many different stories that she has been telling" and "it's in the best interest of justice not to bring charges."[63] If a donation might help their son, then why not. They had the funds so why not use it. They were going around to any senator or member of congress who would listen to them. Edited by brittany, Feb 3 2010, 11:13 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Joan Foster | Feb 3 2010, 11:16 PM Post #152 |
|
I don't think the donation is criticism of the Finnerty's, Brit. I would have donated to Chavez if I had to. But I think we see here that it is likely that after innocence was declared...the attorneys interests and the interests of those seeking "reform" in N.C....diverged. One of them represented Duke soon after, I believe. They would no longer be in tune with those of us here on this Board. Reform is about the kids whose parents love them no less....but just have less. Edited by Joan Foster, Feb 3 2010, 11:19 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 3 2010, 11:52 PM Post #153 |
|
Some general questions (all speculative). I have no idea why they contributed to Edwards. But a few general speculations: If all the upper echelons in the company were donating to Edwards (as part of the firm), weren't there then internal company pressures on the Finnertys to do the same? Weren't they effectively required as upper management to do so? How would it have looked if every executive did so, except the Finnertys? Wouldn't that be regarded as a deliberate snub to Edwards? And wouldn't that in itself have been newsworthy and drawn attention--mainly negative--to the fact? Edwards could not publicly do anything for the Finnertys; he would immediately be compromised by his earlier employment by Fortress. For that reason he had to stay as far away from the case as possible. Had he or his staff realized that the Fortress contributions included money from those specific Finnertys (something they may have overlooked), they might even have felt it the better part of politics to reject it ("so as to avoid the appearance of favoritism were he called upon to comment on the case", or some such...) Maybe they got to know Edwards and liked him. Maybe they asked that he not involve himself, for his sake. Maybe he suggested Wade Smith to them. Maybe they would have contributed anyway. Or maybe they sent the money to buy 'influence'--though for the reasons cited above, he would not have been a good choice. I have no idea. But I'm not criticizing them. Edited by Quasimodo, Feb 3 2010, 11:56 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Joan Foster | Feb 3 2010, 11:52 PM Post #154 |
|
The Evans' family knew Elizabeth Dole. Dave had interned, I believe. in her office. The Finnertys knew Edwards. Such is the paralyzed moral state of our politics that neither of these politicians spoke out in defense of these innocent kids. And, obviously, at least in the case of the Finnertys (judging from the donation)...that silence was accepted as necessary and on some level...understood. Edited by Joan Foster, Feb 3 2010, 11:58 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 4 2010, 04:06 AM Post #155 |
|
This is probably the single best explanation of the global political/legal/real world nature of the Duke Lacrosse Frame that I have seen put into words to date. Very succinct and accurate - a very good job, Quas! |
![]() |
|
| Mason | Feb 4 2010, 04:44 AM Post #156 |
|
Parts unknown
|
I will say this, Edwards wasn't much of a friend then. He was asked his opinion on the Duke LAX case and made no comment. I also agree with Quasi in that any political benefit from this case would've been to let the prosecution go forward. How about David Price? The list is long and undistinguished of those content to let innocent students be hanged. . |
![]() |
|
| Joan Foster | Feb 4 2010, 07:45 AM Post #157 |
|
Agreed. Great post, Quasi. But isn't it pitiful that we continually accept this status quo and assume it is untouchable and unchangeable? Our politics is such that no politician could openly and forcefully advocate the truth in this case...that these kids were innocent and Crystal was a the lowest form of liar. And we just say..."Well, what can we do?" We live in a culture where a demented Durham prostitute must be almost revered and respect for her is essentially IMPOSED...and no solution can challenge those myths or deal with the truth of her sordid life. SHE COULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO FACE CONSEQUENCES because the reputations of the team and the truth were not as important as respective careers and back room alliances. Even the defense lawyers, in the end, had to make a moral compromise to "survive" in a culture where it's "not about the truth." Like the Congress, they were "making sausage", weren't they? That may be political necessity but the bland acceptance of it seems to me to be morally pathetic. Imagine being as close as they were to the suffering in this case and allowing Crystal...on the basis of racial politics and THEIR OWN self-interest ALONE...to "survive" to smear these kids in her book, in classrooms, in her money-grubbing appearances. Well, now they are about the business of rehabilitating John Edwards to the public in preparation for helping him evade the consequences of HIS sordid corrupt life. Nothing to concern us, right? Just the way politics, PR, political correctness and our justice system.... has to be. And we just have to suck it up and accept it. In the end, RCD were cleared but the N.C. cabal of corruption walked away with a pretty good deal too. I doubt these civil trials will go anywhere. |
![]() |
|
| brittany | Feb 4 2010, 08:11 AM Post #158 |
|
Agree. Edited by brittany, Feb 4 2010, 08:12 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| brittany | Feb 4 2010, 08:13 AM Post #159 |
|
I can't begin to imagine the feeling of helplessness they must have endured.. |
![]() |
|
| brittany | Feb 4 2010, 08:15 AM Post #160 |
|
Then there was the Zash family who had no connections and didn't know anyone. One of the 3 boys attorneys recommended Kerry Sutton. There was Kerry Sutton with a Nifong sign on her front lawn. |
![]() |
|
| brittany | Feb 4 2010, 08:16 AM Post #161 |
|
Some attorneys just follow the money. The case exposed to ME what politics and the law is like in North Carolina. It's not pretty.
Edited by brittany, Feb 4 2010, 08:17 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| brittany | Feb 4 2010, 08:49 AM Post #162 |
|
For me, Joe Chesire will always be "The Man". He put himself in front of the TV cameras to exposure what was going on. By doing so he helped them all. Wade Smith was always in the background and rarely said anything..
Edited by brittany, Feb 4 2010, 09:07 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Feb 4 2010, 08:59 AM Post #163 |
|
How's that Mantra of Race, Class, and Gender working out for you Amercia? |
![]() |
|
| cks | Feb 4 2010, 09:16 AM Post #164 |
|
Quasi and Joan: Great posts both. I could never fault the parents for doing whatever they had to do to ensure that their innocent boys would not ever see the inside of a jail cell. Cooper was under tremendous pressure and although many were not happy with the decision not to charge Crystal Mangum, there was, I believe, only so far that Cooper could go. Does that make it right, no it does not. Unfortunately, it is an old boys network in the NC legal system - this I know first hand. Frankly, when Cooper made his announcement I had little hope that he would indeed state what he did - I expected that at best there would be a decision to drop the case for lack of evidence and perhaps some mention of prosecutorial malfeasance (and that would be a long shot since that would entail criticism of one of a "brother lawyer"). It could very well be that the foot dragging in the civil trials is a result of some unstated agreement, some handshake, that was made as a part of the Cooper pronouncement. I doubt that we will ever know. |
![]() |
|
| MikeGaynor | Feb 4 2010, 09:28 AM Post #165 |
|
"Joan," Stuart Taylor publicly said that he thought the Duke case would have collapsed before his first article on it was out and it should have. It also should have collapsed as soon as Dr. Meehan's report was released. His report pointed to Crystal's "multiple male DNA" problem, in scientific jargon. Anyone who read it knew or should have known what to look for and the appropriate materials were duly demanded in discovery by the defense. It was necessary to gety the underlying documentation, untampered with, of course, and, no thanks to Nifong but thanks to Meehan and Judge Smith, it was. By June 2006 I moved from thinking Nifong was a political opportunist prone to wishful thinking to realizing that he was a scoundrel. Excerpts from my articles: June 20: "Let's be real, Mr. Nifong. You seemed to believe that DNA tests would make your case, but DNA tests showed that the accuser had sex with several men but no DNA of even one Duke lacrosse player was found." June 30: ""Mr. Nifong should have wondered about the credibility of the accuser when the DNA samples were eagerly provided, or at least when the DNA found inside the accuser was determined not to have come from any of the Duke lacrosse players but from several other males." In "Give it up, Mike Nifong! Even Ruth Sheehan says so," posted on June 25, 2006, I concluded: "Ms. Sheehan, IF Mr. Nifong had evidence to support the indictments, he would not need to be put out of his misery. As it is, he needs to [be] off the case, out of office and disbarred." As in the "Pimp and Pro" sting, some truth was ignored for political purposes or a better story. The truth is that families of team members had more than enough money and too many important connections for the frame to work, since Nifong was only a big fish in a small pond as well as a scoundrel and a jerk. But, instead of all the truth being exposed, the case was concluded so as not to embarrass the Democrats and the political correctness crowd more than necessary, Crystal got a pass, Nifong spent but a day or so in jail (after all, he was a Democrat) and Duke put up millions for a confidentiality agreement. It's not so shocking that Obama won in 2008 and even carried North Carolina. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic » |







9:29 AM Jul 11