| Newsweek on Crystal Mangum; New Article by Susannah Meadows | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 23 2010, 09:41 PM (2,820 Views) | |
| MikeZPU | Feb 24 2010, 07:51 PM Post #61 |
|
Some times I wonder if Nifong was fully aware of the detail in some of the notes that Himan took during that time. Nifong claimed that he didn't read reports. If that was true, it's certainly possibly that he did not read Himan's notes. Was he aware that Himan recorded in his notes that Kim Roberts said the rape allegation was a "bunch of crock"? Moreover, in Himan's notes at http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2007/07/inv-ben-himans-typed-notes-part-1-march.html in his March 22 interview with Himan, Kim says that Mangum was the one who spilled her drink into the sink in the bathroom. Kim clearly says that she (Kim) took a couple sips out of the drink that she was handed. And that Mangum MAY have taken have taken a couple sips out of her drink -- she wasn't sure. If there was a date rape drug, it should have affected both of them equally (OR only affected Kim if Mangum did not drink out of her cup.) |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 26 2010, 01:35 PM Post #62 |
|
This was posted APRIL 20, four days before Meadows made her TV appearance, and about a week before the Newsweek mug shot cover appeared. [From Poynter Online; URL no longer works.] Getting at the truth was NOT impossible. People far from Durham, who had never been in Durham (let alone spent four weeks there) could figure out the scam right away. Ghosts of the Scottsboro Boys hover over Durham It might do Durham good to step back from the trees, and see how the forest looks through the out-of-state eyes of a born and breed Southerner. I’ve never seen anything in my 34-year journalism career that compares to the apparent racism, motivated by the desire for political gain, that fuels the Duke lacrosse team’s rape accusations. The only high-profile analogy I know is Alabama’s attempt to lynch, legally of course, the Scottsboro Boys in 1931. (snip) The latest public revelation proves defendant Reade Seligmann was nowhere near the accuser’s claimed rape location. The only time for the DA’s crime theory of the rape is 12:10 a.m. to 12:30 a.m. Time-stamped digital photos of the accuser eliminate all other times. The Grand Jury’s indictment claims Mr. Seligmann, “willfully and feloniously, did ravish and carnally know” the accuser “by force and against her will.” Further, he kidnapped her, “for the purposes of terrorizing her and facilitating the commission of the felonies . . .” To be true, the defendant had to pull off those crimes in less than four minutes. That’s all the time there is once you know Mr. Seligmann’s cell phone proves he called a taxi at 12:14 a.m., left the scene at 12:19 a.m., hit his ATM at 12:24 a.m., and digitally checked into his dorm room at 12:49 a.m. (snip) Something else doesn’t show up either: neither his DNA, nor the DNA of anybody else who is white and on the Duke lacrosse team shows up on the accuser - the accuser who was supposedly brutally beaten, raped, and sodomized. Mr. Nifong’s sleight-of-hand explanation was the rapists wore long sleeves and jackets. Mr. Nifong is no magician; his trick doesn’t work once you know the digital photos prove they wore short sleeves. (snip) File as he wills, without a miraculous recovery, he, the police chief, the judge who presides, and every other person whose fingerprints end up on this case, will become infamous. Their legacy will be on par with those involved with the Scottsboro Boys. (snip) Anyone will understand why Mr. Nifong isn’t taking interview appointments. If the truth, mined by journalists, continues to show his actions are as ill bent as they all appear to be so far, he’ll likely face charges of malicious prosecution. If that happens, the chief may well join him in the dock. It’s time for the governor or attorney general to pull the plug on Mr. Nifong and Chief Chalmers. North Carolina’s commitment to eliminating racism in the criminal justice system is on trial across America and around the world. So far, Durham looks to join 1931 Alabama as guilty of racist motivations. Mr. Nifong’s political ambitions are destroying lives, careers, the university, and the community itself. The police chief appears as his accomplice. But justice will come. Just as it did for those who persecuted the Scottsboro Boys. _______________[END] Yet NEWSWEEK couldn't come to the same conclusions, but instead chose to run a cover with mug shots of the accused, making them appear guilty before the whole nation. Didn't NEWSWEEK have anyone with a reasonable capacity to examine the evidence and simply report on what the facts revealed? ? Edited by Quasimodo, Feb 26 2010, 01:37 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 26 2010, 01:42 PM Post #63 |
|
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=67&aid=100214 The S-Word: How High a Hurdle? Posted by Skip Foster at 12:00 AM on Apr. 19, 2006 Here in the Tarheel State, the Duke lacrosse team story is all the talk. This writethru to an Associated Press story moved on the wires Wednesday morning:
Those two paragraphs say a lot about why this story is hot: Race, class, regionalism, religion, politics. What more could a story need? This is the kind of story that quickly leaps into the national consciousness. Journalistically speaking, this is the kind of story that requires the most care. To that end, I have questions in three areas: First, why is the religious affiliation of the boys' prep school relevant to this story worthy of second paragraph play? What if they boys had attended a public school? Or what if they had attended a Presbyterian prep school? Would those have merited such high play? I'm not a Roman Catholic, but if I were, I believe I'd view that as a gratuitous reference to my faith in a story that really has nothing to do with religion at all. Second, how does this matter qualify as a "scandal"? There is, so far as I know, no proof of any wrongdoing. If the charges are dropped or the accused are exonerated, is there a way to "unscandalize" the situation? Also, who decides whether something has reached "scandal" status or not? (snip) In the Duke matter, while there is some evidence of a pattern with the lacrosse team, I haven't heard enough to qualify this as a scandal. There are plenty of other questions about how this story is framed: How are race and class REALLY relevant to this story? Should the accuser be identified? If she remains anonymous, how much detail should be revealed about her? As far as ethics case studies go, this story seems to have it all. Let the debate begin. [So why couldn't NEWSWEEK and the other major national "responsible" media have asked the same questions and shown the same restraint--instead of placing mug shots on the cover?] |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 26 2010, 02:23 PM Post #64 |
|
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2007/sep/09/opinion/chi-oped0909pagesep09 Sunday, September 09, 2007 What the Duke lacrosse case has taught us By Clarence Page and A Member Of The Tribunes Editorial Board When Mike Nifong reported to jail Friday to serve a 24-hour sentence inDurham, N.C., a small band of die-hard supporters carried signs that said, “Webelieve in your integrity and goodness.” I wonder if they believe in the toothfairy too. Every wicked man is right in his own eyes, the Book of Proverbs says. But that doesn’t mean that the rest of us should cheer him on. Nifong is the former Durham County district attorney who brought the notoriously bogus rape case against three Duke University lacrosse team members, a rape case that turned out to have no rape. |
![]() |
|
| foxglove | Feb 26 2010, 08:36 PM Post #65 |
|
Unfortunately the MSM is not to be trusted and it is hardly new. Whether it is Operation Mockingbird or the Committee on Public Information, public opinion is often carefully manipulated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Public_Information "The purpose of CPI was to influence American public opinion toward supporting U.S. intervention in World War I via a prolonged propaganda campaign. Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays, the latter of whom had remarked that 'the essence of democratic society' was the 'engineering of consent', by which propaganda was the necessary method for democracies to promote and garner support for policy... The CPI at first used material that was based on fact, but spun it to present an upbeat picture of the American war effort. Very quickly, the CPI began churning out raw propaganda picturing Germans as evil monsters. Hollywood movie makers joined in on the propaganda by making movies such as The Claws of the Hun..." IIRC, Walter Lippmann was also part of Operation Mockingbird. It seems the same formula is used but different groups are plugged in at different times in history. As far as the reference to the boys having attended Roman Catholic private schools, the pc or Marxist crowd is hostile to religion particularly to the Catholic religion. The pc or Marxist crowd include those who believe in the feminist (abortion) and gay agendas and religion gets in the way of that. The religious aspect of the Duke lax case is not as clearcut but it was another aspect of the boys' identity which could be held against them. The Durham area was (and probably still is) a center for population control (The Carolina Population Center at UNC). If you look at history, it is clear, IMO, there has been a low intensity war against the Catholic Church and other traditional religions for some time. Perhaps that new Catholic Student Center housed on Buchanan St. was a source of irritation to the rabid feminists and gay activists in the Durham area. That the Finnerty family contributed financially to that Catholic Student Center on Buchanan St. may or may not be a factor in the Duke lax case. The religious aspect probably does not rise to the level of the race, gender, and class aspect, but I find it just as interesting. The other interesting thing which hasn't gotten much attention is the theatrical/artistic leanings of many of those responsible in this case, for whatever it is worth. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Feb 27 2010, 06:02 AM Post #66 |
|
See how the Federal Government sold withholding to the people by calling it "pay as you go." The Plan That Slogans Built: The Revenue Act of 1943 http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/cf7c9c870b600b9585256df80075b9dd/671f701c110a19d985256e430079173d?OpenDocument |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 27 2010, 11:50 AM Post #67 |
|
|
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 27 2010, 11:51 AM Post #68 |
|
|
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 27 2010, 11:52 AM Post #69 |
|
|
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 27 2010, 12:11 PM Post #70 |
|
The above motion was filed THE SAME DAY as Meadows' interview with CBS. What a different picture of the case they give! And yet Meadows spent 4 WEEKS in Durham and couldn't get even a hint of how questionable Mangum's testimony might be? |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Feb 27 2010, 12:13 PM Post #71 |
|
Consider # 2 above: "Any deal, promise, inducement, or benefit the State has made or may make in the future to her;" I assume that would cover how she managed to get out of attempting to run down a police officer, too; plus payments to her as a 'rape victim'; etc. It would be relevant to know all of this. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." |
|
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |







7:15 PM Jul 10