| The perils for the non-indicted players | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 3 2010, 02:34 PM (302 Views) | |
| Quasimodo | Mar 3 2010, 02:34 PM Post #1 |
|
(repost from Bill Anderson) : The media spin on the lawsuits brought by the non-indicted players and their families against Duke, Durham, and Nifong has been that these people really never were in any kind of danger, and that they have no reason to sue. Furthermore, we are told, the lacrosse players were a bunch of drunkard bums who were peeing on the sidewalks, keeping their neighbors up at all hours of the night with wild parties, and generally living like animals. Since they were not indicted, we are told, they really were not in danger, and especially after the indictment of David Evans in May, 2006. That simply is untrue. First, and most important, without the one-vote margin that permitted the state bar to bring charges against Nifong while the criminal case still was alive, Nifong might well have brought the case to trial and might even have won a conviction on a lesser charge of sexual battery or something like that. Had that been the scenario, then every player on that team then could have been indicted for aiding and abetting sexual battery, and every one of them could have gone to prison. This is not a wild statement; those who were at the party could not have helped but witness the assault, so they would have been de facto guilty. If a Durham jury would have convicted Dave, Reade, and Collin, Durham juries would have just as easily convicted the rest of the players. Second, even if Judge Smith had agreed to throw out the ID process by which Crystal identified her "attackers," the players would have been tainted with this event for the rest of their lives, even more so than they are now. People would have claimed that they "got off on a technicality," and would have considered all of them guilty. Since there has been a sizable number of people willing to believe that "something happened," even after Roy Cooper made it absolutely clear that nothing happened, think of the reaction had the case died with the bad ID process. All of the players would have been considered guilty, and there would be no "innocent" statements from authorities behind them. Given what I have seen in the North Carolina system, judges are extremely deferential to prosecutors. I cannot imagine Judge Smith, who was quite deferential and kind to a prosecutor who lied to him time and again, being willing to kill the case on the issue of IDs. It seems to me that prosecutors pretty much serve not only as prosecutors, but de facto judges and juries in that state. Don't think for a second that had he gotten convictions, that Nifong would have stopped there. The community would have demanded action against the rest of the players, and nothing would have stopped him from throwing another 30-40 players into prison. Thus, these families had plenty to fear, and the threats they faced were real. This is not scare talk; it is the reality of what they were facing. |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Mar 3 2010, 02:35 PM Post #2 |
|
§ 14‑5.2. Accessory before fact punishable as principal felon. All distinctions between accessories before the fact and principals to the commission of a felony are abolished. Every person who heretofore would have been guilty as an accessory before the fact to any felony shall be guilty and punishable as a principal to that felony. However, if a person who heretofore would have been guilty and punishable as an accessory before the fact is convicted of a capital felony, and the jury finds that his conviction was based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of one or more principals, coconspirators, or accessories to the crime, he shall be guilty of a Class B2 felony. [And that doesn't even begin to address accessories during, and after the fact; or witnesses who, by refusing to provide testimony, or lie (and if Crystal was believed, then they must be disbelieved), obstruct justice. And I'm sure that Nifong and Stephens would have piled the charges on.] Edited by Quasimodo, Mar 3 2010, 02:37 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Mar 3 2010, 02:39 PM Post #3 |
|
March 28, 2006 AP story reprinted in Winston-Salem Journal
http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/S...d=1137834987891 |
![]() |
|
| Bill Anderson | Mar 3 2010, 09:40 PM Post #4 |
|
Exactly. Had Nifong been able to secure convictions, I am convinced he would have gone after the other players. And, given what I saw from the crowd at the NCCU forum and the local people of Durham who brutalized Reade Seligmann at his hearing, a Durham jury would have had no problem convicting those young men. Evidence? Who needs evidence? Remember what Harris Johnson said about "white people buying justice" in Durham? If one of the most prominent Democrats in North Carolina could make a statement like that, then does anyone really think that people in Durham wanted a fair trial? They wanted and were going to get their conviction, just as long as Nifong could get it to trial. Had the state bar not filed charges against him, I am convinced that Nifong would have taken it to trial and at worst would have had a hung jury.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |







7:14 PM Jul 10