| Blog and Media Roundup - Thursday, March 4, 2010; News Roundup | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 4 2010, 06:09 AM (304 Views) | |
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 06:09 AM Post #1 |
|
http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story_news_durham/6563170/article-City-does-not-plan-to-change-sign-law?instance=main_article City does not plan to change sign law 03.03.10 - 11:59 pm Durham officials feel digital billboard debate too involved By Ray Gronberg gronberg@heraldsun.com; 419-6648 DURHAM -- A Georgia company's push to amend Durham law to allow digital billboards has apparently inspired other businesses to signal city and county officials that they'd like to see the local sign ordinance rewritten. But on Wednesday City Council members and county commissioners who sit on a joint panel that oversees local efforts to regulate land use had a firm answer to that: No. "I'm not interested in opening this can of worms," said Councilwoman Diane Catotti, chairwoman of the Joint City/County Planning Committee. The committee's discussion of the broader sign ordinance came as administrators prepare to send to the Durham Planning Commission next month a so-called "text amendment" on billboards requested by Fairway Outdoor Advertising. Planning Director Steve Medlin said he's fielded "numerous requests for other changes" to the law since Fairway started its push for digital billboards. Those requests cover the gamut of possible changes, Medlin said, listing "taller signs, larger signs, more signs, off-premises signs by night, digital signs, portable signs and temporary signs" among the things people have sought. He didn't say who's pushing the issue. Medlin added that once the pressure surfaced, City Manager Tom Bonfield suggested sounding out to elected officials on whether they're still supportive of the restrictions they or their predecessors wrote into the law some 20 years ago. The "way to do that," Medlin said, was by running the question past the Joint City/County Planning Committee. But Senior Assistant City Attorney Karen Sindelar warned the panel's members Wednesday that reopening the sign ordinance would expose local governments to the risk of a lawsuit. "Sign regulation in general is a legal minefield," one the city and county had previously navigated on their way to writing a defensible ordinance, Sindelar said. She noted that defending the billboard regulations in the late 1980s and early 1990s cost the city up to about $1.5 million. The risk comes once officials start tinkering, she said, adding that if the city and county allow now-banned digital billboards, it's likely they'd be forced eventually to allow other types of digital advertising as a matter of fairness. But a counterpart of Sindelar's from the county attorney's office, Kathy Everett-Perry, said that while "there is a chance you could open yourselves to a lawsuit," she and her colleagues believe "it is possible to craft an ordinance that's defensible." Whether elected officials want to try to is up to them, Everett-Perry added. Catotti made it clear the city government in her opinion doesn't need the aggravation of launching a major ordinance rewrite, or another lawsuit, given the pressures it's facing on other fronts. "I do fear litigation. It's a lengthy and costly process," she said. "I hope I don't have to remind any of you that the city still has very significant litigation pending against it on other issues -- I'll just say 'lacrosse.' We're talking about a $30 million lawsuit. This is ongoing." In addition, there are already hints that departments like Medlin's and the city attorney's office will have to absorb budget cuts that will erode their capacity to address new issues, she said. Coming out of the fiscal 2010-11 debate this spring, "we're going to see significant staff reductions," Catotti said. County commissioners present weren't any more eager to dive into the issue. "I've been there and done that, and it's a hefty task," County Commissioner Ellen Reckhow said, noting that she'd served on the group that produced the current sign ordinance. "Passions rise high when you're dealing with signs." The billboard issue has already exposed officials to that. In the past week or so, council members have received hundreds of e-mails from residents opposing Fairway Outdoor's digital-billboards request. Also, a poll by the Durham Convention & Visitors Bureau found that 72 percent of residents support the current restrictions. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 06:14 AM Post #2 |
|
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/ Thursday, March 4, 2010 Young man falsely accused of rape tells False Rape Society his gripping story We're keeping this young man's name anonymous. His story is powerful and gripping. I thank him for sharing it with us, and I wish we could encourage him. Hi. I am 24 years old and currently a veteran of the armed forces. I have served in Iraq twice in the regular army as a combat engineer (infantry with explosives, basically your a jack of all trades). I got out of the army a couple of months ago and I am currently in college. My story started last summer when we got back from Iraq. My best friend and I went to a night club and long story short I had sex with a woman. This woman was a female soldier and ended up being late to work the next morning. I was on leave at the time, so I didn't have to go too work. She accused me of raping her, because she was going to show up to work drunk and late. This is a huge issue in the armed forces, where you just can't call off work -- it would be considered AWOL (absent without leave) or even more serious in cases of wartime, desertion (we are currently at war). My friend and I were arrested, he was later released. I had to wait at the mp station until 1pm (this all started around 6:30-7am) until CID showed up. The CID agent tried to get me to talk to him, which probably would have been the dumbest thing I could ever do. I really wanted to though, I just wanted to scream it out loud I didn't do this, I didn't rape anybody. I wisely said, "I should probably talk to a lawyer." I was taken to the post clinic where I had a rape kit performed. To the unknowning, let me explain what this means.... They entered my barracks room found a pt shirt and shorts (army workout clothes -- think black short shorts and a gray t shirt with a word "ARMY" written in black on the chest). They, of course, couldn't find pt shoes (running shoes) because all my stuff was still at the bottom of my duffle bag (we had just gotten back from Iraq), so they grabbed a pair of crocs. I was taken to a doctor's waiting room, I was told to completely strip naked. While I was naked the CID agent took pictures of every part of me. The doctor then swabbed my penis 2-3 times, then pulled hair from every part of my body. The CID agent took all my clothes, and gave me my army pt shirt and shorts and my crocs. I was then taken to his car where we went to the CID station. At the CID station I was fingerprinted, and told to sit in a room and wait. One hour later he came for me and took me to my units staff duty office. I was given a protection from abuse paper which said I could not come in contact with her or my best friend. I was told I was no longer on leave and I had to report to work tomorrow at 6:30am. This all ended for me that day around 3pm. I will never forget the look the staff duty nco (non commisioned officer, aka sergeant) and the officers gave me. Like I was some kind of worm, dogshit on the bottom of there shoes. In the past I have had problems with alcohol. I fixed it and got some healthy drinking habits. This of course blew the lid off of all of that. No one in my platoon was back from leave yet, so I had nobody to talk to. I just had to take the stares, the talking under the breath I heard as I walked past a group of soldiers. Someone started a rumor that when I was at the MP station, someone asked if I raped her and I said, "yeah I did it." That probably sounds ridiculous to you but soldiers gossip about 10x more, and harder, than any episode of "Desperate Housewives"/"Sex In The City" you have ever seen. I would go out alone and not talk too anybody, just drink my ass off. The army lawyer I was given explained to me that I would probably win my court martial when it happened. It was going to happen because army prosecutors in cases of sexual assault/rape HAVE to take it too court martial. Unless you proved you weren't even there when the rape occured, or the victim recants. He told me he had spoken to CID and they aren't sure about her story so they might ask me to take a polygraph. I was very skeptical about a polygraph. The reasons I was skeptical, that's easy, I was torturing myself. I would drink and think about it constantly, I thought maybe I had done it? What if she was black-out drunk? What if she had come out of her black-out with me on top of her? Maybe someone actually thought that I raped her? I went over and over in my mind about that . . . . I am an intelligent person, I know from watching the History Channel and the Discovery Channel as a child what a polygraph is and how it worked. I just thought about it and thought about it over and over. So basically in the army unless a victim recants, if you were there or had relations with her, it is going to court martial. The army lawyer told me he might as well specialize in this field. He has had 10ish in the time that he came to the post. He went on to explain every single case he has won. He was trying to convince the prosecutor downstairs to stop taking them to court martial. I hated women because of this, I would go out to bars at night and not talk to anybody. I even was propositioned a few times by attractive women, I told them all to go away and leave me alone. I was very rude about this, the women would usually respond that I was a faggot bla bla bla. Like I said, I was very rude and deserved that response. I had this fear and it continues to this day of this happening again. My platoon got back from leave and I once again had people to talk too. No one could believe it, my first sergeant, whom I trusted, took me to his car and had me explain the story. He told me he knows I didn't do it and wouldn't tell anyone even if CID came calling. The reason for this is, once again, the army rumor mill. My lawyer told me not too talk to anybody about the case. Let's say I told Sergeant so-so, who later on while playing x box and drinking a beer tells specialist snuffy, who while at the motor pool the next day tells Private Jack and Private Black and it turns into some crazy story. CID can then use that story in their investigation, there are no secrets in the military. I was stop-lossed for my second deployment to Iraq. I really should have been out of the military one plus year ago. I should have been able to waive the waiting 90 days after a deployment and been able to get out in. like, a month. My plan was to do this and get out in time for the summer semester in college. It was now almost October, the investigation had been going on for 3-4 months now. I was at a hospital with my squad leader for a doctor's appointment. He was about to leave and was going to pick me up in an hour or so when he came back for some reason. He told me the investigation was over the victim had recanted, my unit had just gotten the call. It felt like such a weight was off my shoulders. I mean when you see someone on the news accused of a crime you either think they're guilty and condemn them or think there innocent and you empathize. If you know the person and they're a friend, you console them. You say stuff like "the truth will come out, bro," and you're shocked if they are found guilty. However you don't think about it any farther than that. When I started thinking about it, I realized wow, I could be put in jail for 20+ years for something I did not do. I would be in Fort Leavenworth, my life completely over. When I got out I would have to register as a sex offender. I would literally have to move to Mexico to live anything like a normal life. It wasn't over for me yet though. My lawyer called my unit and said he needed to speak with me to tell me all the details. As I walked into his office he was screaming at someone on the phone. He was actually yelling expletives into the phone, I was told to wait outside. As I was ushered into the office he told me to sit down and started reading her statement. In a nutshell it basically said, "I was late and I didn't think IT was going to be a big deal" (meaning, "it would not be a big deal if I said he raped me so I wouldn't get in trouble"). Not a f*cking big deal? I felt like ripping shit apart, not a f*cking big deal? You nearly ruined my entire f*cking life. I drink all the f*cking time, habitually now, I can't bring myself to even talk to women, I fear them. I am a complete and total shut-in, I don't even go out anymore. I just sit in my room drinking and listening to music and playing f*cking World of Warcraft. The leadership in my platoon wants me to get out ASAP because I show up in the morning hungover and smelling like an open bar. He went on to explain that he was screaming into the phone because even after that statement CID wanted to pursue charges of aggravated sexual assault. Which is a lesser charge of rape, I believe that is the charge he said, but it's been a few months. He went on to explain it's completely not legal, it's just the army and their policy on sexual assault and rape in the military. Like I said before, its usually in every case going to go to court martial. With her statement there is absolutely no way I could lose. He went on to say that he had teamed up with the prosecutor on this and they both told CID that it was illegal what they were doing. The prosecutor was extremely angry because this would have been another case he would of had too bring to trial and lose. I was told that everything was dropped after a few more phone calls the lawyer made. I was honorably discharged from the military in October. I have been out of the military now for almost half a year and currently a college student. ____________________________ I don't go out anymore, I haven't been to a bar since I was in the military. I haven't had sex with a woman or even hit on anybody since the false allegations. I sit alone on weekends drinking a bottle of scotch and putting off school work until the last possible second. I sometimes miss class because my dumbass thinks, well, I can just have a glass or two and wake up at 6 in the morning and be at school by 8. I know there's something wrong with me, I just don't know where to go for help. I figured you could probably post this story on your blog and it could be another piece of evidence why these laws need to be changed. Nothing happened signifigant to the woman, she got an article 15 for being drunk on duty. Thats just 15 days of restriction and extra duty. I went through a personal hell for four months. She cost the military probably upwards of 50+ thousand dollars. Think about the expense, the whole process of an investigation. That's hundreds of hours in processing and investigating. Everything would have to be checked and double-checked. No one wants a case to be thrown out because something wasn't done properly during the investigation. That's several DNA tests on her clothes, the bedsheets, my clothes, my friend's clothes. Disease checks on everything that could be transmitted by fluid exchange. That's lab time that could be used to process something else, like a murder. Furthermore, if this had gone forward, the costs of a full military court martial. To determine whether or not a woman was raped by someone there are a few things they look at. First it's the character of the alleged victim. Does she appear truthful, visibly hurt, emotionally upset etc. They look at how sexually promiscous she is, which feminists say violates women's rights. The woman who accused me I later learned had been through half of our sister engineer company. They had gotten back from Iraq a few months before we did. The police also look at the evidence. For example vaginal tears caused by lack of lubrication or rough sex. Bruises, scratches, marks etc. the victim may have received from the alleged perp. DNA evidence, like semen that proves you had sex with that person. The police then re-question the victim several times to make sure her story is consistent. The problem with all of this is every allegation of rape is taken deadly serious. Also, the majority of evidence in a rape case can be caused by rough sex. Now note that I am not talking about some unnamed person dragging a woman down a dark alley, beating the shit out of her then raping her. In the vast majority of rape cases this doesn't happen. The problem is anything in a rape case can be DAMNING evidence for the accused. It is looked down upon by juries for attacking the character of an alleged victim. If done wrong you might have just put your client in prison. The victim's appearance, age, gender, race, and occupation all work against the accused. Imagine a vanilla white, Jessica Simpson look-alike, daughter of a southern baptist preacher accuses someone of rape? The problem with this crime is it usually happens behind closed doors and the truth of the matter is you never really know. Thanks for reading my story. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 06:17 AM Post #3 |
|
http://dukechronicle.com/article/city-council-looks-close-13m-deficit City Council looks to close $13M deficit By Caitlin Johnson March 4, 2010 Subtitle: Property taxes likely to increase by 4% The city of Durham’s 2010-2011 fiscal year’s budget will likely shift gears from focusing on cutting costs to increasing revenue. At this stage of the budget process, having completed two preliminary meetings with the City Council and remaining in conversation with citizens during his “Coffee with Council” sessions, City Manager Tom Bonfield said it is too early to determine which programs will be cut, but noted that the city will need to prioritize its services to close its nearly $13 million budget gap. “We are in better shape than last year, when we faced a $40 million budget gap,” Bonfield said. “But we have fewer and fewer options to cut without having significant consequences.” The city will work toward decreasing expenditures before looking to increase revenues. Nonetheless, property taxes are expected to increase, as they make up the largest source of income that can be changed without special legislation. Increasing the tax rate by 5.8 cents per $100 of assessed property value would make up for the entire deficit, and represent a nearly 11 percent increase over current rates, The (Durham) Herald-Sun reported Feb. 27. City Council member Eugene Brown said the city may have to compromise with a tax increase of 4 cents. “Each penny would represent $2.1 to $2.2 million in revenue,” Brown said. “And $8 million will be used to simply service the existing bonds.” In 2005 and 2007, voters approved city bond referendums for approximately $130 million in borrowing. This money was pledged from property taxes and will have to be figured into the fiscal budget, Bonfield said. “[This fiscal year] some of the debt will have to come online,” Bonfield said. “It was always the case that it would happen.” Without a tax increase, the city would exceed its current debt-service cost level—the percent of the budget that is devoted to paying debt. The debt ratio is currently set at 15 percent, which is generally considered the advisable limit. Despite the sizable budget gap, Mayor Bill Bell introduced the possibility of a $20 million bond initiative to service the remaining unsurfaced roads over a three-year period at the City Council’s second budget retreat Feb. 26. “We sent out a survey that asked what were the city’s priorities,” Bell said. “The need that came up as number one is to resurface our streets. With the last two bond initiatives, we will have resurfaced half the streets in two years.” One of the ways the proposed bond will be paid off is through property taxes, which would further increase the debt-ratio, Bell said. He noted that if this bond becomes a viable option, voters would have to take these consequences into consideration. Brown said he would be reluctant to support any new initiatives, wanting the city to focus instead on protecting core services, such as public safety. “We are losing too many police officers to other communities,” he said. “Our training is very good, but we are [effectively] training them for other communities. We need to make their pay comparable.” Brown said, however, that he would not support pay raises for other city employees. “I don’t know any other city that can do it during these times,” he said, referring to a possible raise in city employee wages. “It’s not an easy task, believe me. But we were elected to make the hard decisions.” A pay for performance plan would reward city employees for exceptional job performance with raises and bonuses. Bonfield said that whether the plan is feasible remains to be seen, but he added that the council wanted to look for as many ways to compensate employees as possible. The deadline for city departments to present their budgets is Friday. Bonfield and the department of Budget and Management Services will spend the next few weeks going over the recommendations, and will present a draft of the budget to the City Council in May. The Council will then have the opportunity to make counter recommendations. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 06:21 AM Post #4 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/03/04/368689/officials-wary-of-billboard-changes.html Published Thu, Mar 04, 2010 05:15 AM Modified Thu, Mar 04, 2010 12:13 AM Officials wary of billboard changes DURHAM Changing a 20-year-old law that effectively bans billboards in most of Durham could lead the city and county to a "legal minefield," Assistant City Attorney Karen Sindelar said Wednesday. But some elected officials are not ready to rule out a requested revision that would allow electronic signs and upgrades for billboards. "As an elected official, I want to make certain I am open to everything that comes before me," said Mayor Pro Tem Cora Cole-McFadden. Fairway Outdoor Advertising, a Georgia company that owns most of the remaining billboards in Durham County, wants to change a local law to move some of its signs, upgrade others and switch some to digital operation. In addition, City-County Planning Director Steve Medlin said his department has had "numerous other inquiries" about loosening restrictions on sign size, height, numbers and technology. On Wednesday, he sought advice from a committee of City Council members and county commissioners in determining a departmental position. "This is just me coming to you for guidance," he said. Since Fairway first inquired about a change in 2008, residents and neighborhood groups opposing the idea have mostly cited aesthetic or traffic-safety issues. The issue getting discussion Wednesday, though, was the possibility that changing any part of the current law could open Durham's ordinance to legal challenges it has already survived at considerable cost. The original billboard ordinance took effect in 1984, Sindelar said, "and the city was immediately sued." Litigation went on until 1994, when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear a billboard company's appeal. Defending the ordinance then cost Durham between $1 million and $1.5 million, Sindelar said. City Council member Mike Woodard said elected officials should wait until after the Durham Planning Commission, a citizens advisory group, hears Fairway's request April 13 before weighing in. Kathy Everett-Perry of the County Attorney's Office said the ordinance could probably be updated in a legally defensible way, but City Council member Diane Catotti advised caution. She reminded the committee that the city is already dealing with a $30 million lawsuit stemming from the Duke lacrosse incident of 2006. "I'm not interested in opening this can of worms," Catotti said. jim.wise@newsobserver.com or 919-932-2004 |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 06:30 AM Post #5 |
|
http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/topic/3006199/1/?x=50#new Monday, March 1, 2010 $1,000 offered for logical explanation of illogical statement In a Newsweek web exclusive by Susannah Meadows dated February 23, 2010, is the following passage: As the trial wore on, one defendant's mother, Rae Evans even expressed sympathy for Mangum. "You know, when I'm trying to get over the rage, I am thinking about so deeply this young woman who has been abused by men all her life, and nobody has abused her more than Mike Nifong," she said, referring to the Durham prosecutor. In accordance with many error-plagued media articles about the Duke Lacrosse case and its original prosecutor former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, Newsweek writer Susannah Meadows stated that a trial was held in the Duke Lacrosse case. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Most people, at least those in North Carolina, are aware of the fact that after Mr. Nifong was forced to recuse himself from the case, the Attorney General’s Office dropped charges against the three Duke Lacrosse defendants. A trial date was never set, a jury was never selected, and a trial was never held. Whether or not this misstatement was the honest result of sloppy journalism, or the willful attempt to mislead the reader, I do not know. What I find most ludicrous is the quote attributed to Rae Evans, mother of Duke Lacrosse defendant Dave Evans. Ms. Evans states, “… I am thinking about so deeply this young woman who has been abused by men all her life, and nobody has abused her (Crystal Mangum) more than Mike Nifong.” Naturally, Rae Evans does not explain how she came to the conclusion that Mike Nifong abused Ms. Mangum, and how the abuse she suffered at his hands is worse than the abuse she suffered at the hands of other men. Is she talking physical abuse? Emotional abuse? Mental abuse? Spiritual abuse? And, of course, writer Meadows doesn’t delve into the issue or question the alleged abuse by Mr. Nifong. She just tosses it out there like a piece of rotten bologna for the media subscribers to consume. More media Jedi mind-tricks played on the public. In my quest to try and understand the illogical statement by Ms. Evans, I am offering a one thousand dollar ($1,000.00) award to anyone who can explain to me what Rae Evans said and meant in her quote about Mr. Nifong’s abusive behavior toward Ms. Mangum. The explanation must make sense and be reasonable in order to collect the prize. This offer is open worldwide, without age restrictions, and without I.Q. restrictions. I alone will make the judgment as to whether or not any of the entries satisfies the requirement needed to be granted the award. The payment, if any is forthcoming, will be made by cashier’s check, and will be presented after James Arthur Johnson receives the $20,000.00 reward offered by the family and friends of Brittany Willis for solving the death of the young Wilson teen. Entries can be made either in the comment section of the blog, or sent by e-mail to: justice4nifong@gmail.com. Unfortunately, the Newsweek article was as anti-Nifong biased as they come. For Newsweek to assign the subject matter to a Duke alum staff writer (Ms. Meadows) doesn’t instill much confidence that an evenhanded and objective work will be the end product. And Ms. Meadows states that this is the sad final chapter to the Duke lacrosse scandal…? Don’t count on it! The final chapter in the Duke Lacrosse saga will end with Mike Nifong’s law license being unilaterally and unconditionally reinstated by the North Carolina State Bar. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 06:32 AM Post #6 |
|
See Swifty's reference to Carpetbagger Jihad® in the comments section of the above post. Hilarious!!!
|
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 06:39 AM Post #7 |
|
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2010/mar/04/thomas-faces-sentencing-on-more-charges/ Thomas faces sentencing on more charges Report: He planned to join Guard before meeting Cobbins By Jamie Satterfield Thursday, March 4, 2010 Fresh out of rehab, George Thomas stood poised to join the National Guard. He never did and five years later, Thomas is serving life without parole and today facing sentencing for a slew of felonies all related to the January 2007 torture slaying of Channon Christian, 21, and Christopher Newsom, 23. An investigation of Thomas' history conducted in the run-up to today's sentencing hearing before Knox County Criminal Court Judge Richard Baumgartner revealed Thomas' plan in 2005 to become a Guardsman. "He said he started using Hydrocodone and Valium during his early 20s and was gradually using three or four Valiums on most days," the report of the probe stated. After racking up convictions in Memphis for misdemeanor charges including theft and pot possession, Thomas, now 27, went into rehab. He completed one program and entered another. "He said he left the program to join the National Guard," the report stated. But Thomas insisted he put off boot camp to work to pay off court fines. It's not clear how he intended to pay those fines. He held a handful of jobs but none for more than a few months, the report showed. He wound up moving to Lebanon, Ky., where he has a 3-year-old son. He met slaying co-defendant Letalvis Cobbins via a job at an Amazon warehouse. The pair would eventually join Cobbins' brother, Lemaricus Davidson, in what authorities allege were Knoxville's most horrific crimes. Christian and Newsom were headed out on a date when they were carjacked and kidnapped at the Washington Ridge Apartments complex in North Knoxville. Authorities say they were taken to Davidson's Chipman Street house, raped and beaten. Newsom was shot and his body set on fire. Christian was stuffed inside a trash can in Davidson's house, where she suffocated. Davidson has been sentenced to death in the case. Cobbins is serving life without parole in the murders and last week racked up another 100 years for the kidnapping, robbery and rapes leading up to the deaths. Thomas today faces sentencing on those same kidnapping, robbery and rape convictions. His defenders, Tom Dillard and Stephen Ross Johnson, have filed a list of so-called mitigating factors they urge Baumgartner to consider when meting out Thomas' punishment. They cite Thomas' troubled childhood as one reason for judicial mercy. Although his mother worked hard to support her family, his crack-addicted father deeply impacted Thomas, they argue. "He was an abusive, disruptive and dominating figure," the attorneys wrote. "Mr. Thomas' father on several occasions when Mr. Thomas was a young child strapped Mr. Thomas to a pole and beat him." Baumgartner also today will hear motions in the case of Thomas' co-defendant Vanessa Coleman, who faces a May trial. Jamie Satterfield may be reached at 865-342-6308. |
![]() |
|
| cks | Mar 4 2010, 06:41 AM Post #8 |
|
How can anyone read this and not feel very strongly that women who cry rape when none occurred should not be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? I hope that this young man is able to find help so that he can go forward and live the life that he once wanted to enjoy. This should also be required reading for any young man who thinks that this could never happen to him. |
![]() |
|
| nyesq83 | Mar 4 2010, 09:22 AM Post #9 |
|
The Diamondback > News Police use pepper spray, horses in clash with students on Route 1 Thousands clamor downtown in first riot in four years By Ben Slivnick | Thursday, March 4, 2010 Jaclyn Borowski Mounted police officers and students stood back from each other on Route 1 during last night’s riot. Jaclyn Borowski Jaclyn Borowski For the first time in a college generation, university students took to Route 1, took down street signs and rioted. At 11:07 p.m., Greivis Vazquez hit a free throw to clinch the Terrapins’ first victory Duke after six consecutive losses in the series. At 11:10 p.m., rancorous, cheering students bellowing, “F--- Duke,” from downtown bars poured outside in a demonstration that built slowly from streetside shouting to the point where horse-mounted police in full riot gear could not clear Route 1 in a single sweep through the street. Just before midnight, mounted horses descended on the thousands of students who mobbed Route 1, yelling, dancing and throwing possessions ranging from shoes to beer cans. The students at first taunted the police’s encroach, cheering, “Defense! Defense!” and “Let’s go Maryland,” as police sprayed pepper gas and a helicopter flew over head. The mob scattered temporarily. When students returned to the streets, an armored vehicle and Prince George’s County Police paddy wagons rolled onto Route 1, and police started making arrests. It took nearly 20 minutes for police to clear the street. University Police spokesman Paul Dillon estimated the crowd on Route 1 exceeded 1,500 people. Dillon said police made several arrests but could not specify how many. Both Dillon and Cpl. Mike Rodriguez, a spokesman for Prince George’s County Police, said no injuries had been reported. “We were hopeful it wouldn’t happen, that they would come out and celebrate in another way, but we prepared for that case, and it did happen,” Dillon said. “Apparently, a regular season win over the No. 4 team allows thousands of people to come out and block roadways and start fires — and that’s disappointing, to say the least.” For students, their first College Park riot was anything but a disappointment. Sophomore business major Kyle Bisciotti had heard of the university’s uproarious reputation before he sent in his college applications but said last night’s show of jubilation and destruction exceeded even the loftiest tales he heard of riots past as a high school student. “It way exceeded my expectations,” he said. “I knew we’d be down here partying, but look at this place, we’re running a rampage through Route 1.” Still, despite the enthusiasm of students charged with adrenaline and alcohol, last night’s Route 1 romp was mild compared to past riots. In 2001, after the Terrapin basketball team lost a Final Four matchup against Duke, students burnt couches and tore Ludwig Field’s soccer goals from the ground, carried them to Fraternity Row and lit them ablaze. Late last night, at least one administrator sought to downplay the scene on Route 1. “I wouldn’t call tonight’s activities a riot,” Vice President for Student Affairs Linda Clement said at about 1:30 a.m. “We’ll see how the night plays out.” Clement, who oversees the university’s Office of Student Conduct, reiterated the university’s policy of expulsion for any student caught at a riot. Dillon echoed Clement’s vigilant attitude with a stern warning. “The message is if you’re going to be a part of a crowd like that, you’re going to be met with police, and you’re going to be arrested. And if you’re a student, you’re going to be referred the Office of Student Conduct for possible sanctions by the university,” Dillon said. After the campus’ most recent riot in 2006, university officials tightened rioting punishments and charged seven students with student conduct violations. All their charges were dropped or severely reduced, but at the time, officials vowed they would not extend such immunity if an incident broke out again. The legacy of the university’s strict rules lingered over students before the rioting began in earnest, and after four years without such an incident, expectations for the night were mixed. Toward the end of last night’s basketball game, police cars and officers lingered in downtown College Park, but businesses remained open with their doors unlocked, and many of the first students who trickled outside after the game said they weren’t expecting a full blown riot. It took more than half an hour after the game’s final buzzer before officials closed down Route 1, and as students chanted and set off fireworks during the early stage of the demonstration, many students said they weren’t expecting the mob-scene to escalate. “After the riots when we won the national championship, they cracked down hardcore,” said Chetan Mehta, a senior physics major, at about 11:15 p.m., before students spilled onto Route 1. Mehta, a statistics minor, predicted a 33 percent chance of a riot. “There are a lot of police out here, but also a damn lot of people are drunk, so you never know,” Mehta said at the time. And his skepticism proved warranted. As hordes of students descended on the downtown area from Comcast Center, a critical mass swamped Route 1 between 11:30 and 11:45 p.m., prompting officials to close the street. Jumping and cheering in unison, students amid the mosh ripped out street signs and crowd surfed, and at one point attempted to tip a bus as the driver smiled. The students dispersed initially but then returned to the street before a second swoop pushed students onto Knox Road and into nearby parking lots. During that push, sophomore psychology major Justin Hoff said police beat him with a night stick and broke his phone. “They grabbed me by my arm,” he said. “They knocked me down and smacked me in the back of my neck.” With the students expelled from Route 1, flanks of police held their positions, arresting any student who approached. At about 12:24 a.m., police made a final push, forcing students out of the parking lots and onto the campus or residential neighborhoods. As students fled, at least one officer near Montgomery Hall fired rubber bullets, but even that show of force did not contain the mayhem. Moments later, a group of students lit fire to a Duke shirt. Watching as the shirt went up in flames and smoldered on a nearby tree, Sam Kool, a sophomore criminology major, mused on students’ motivations. “It’s basically the looking glass mirror,” Kool said. “People are just doing this because they’re expected to.” Staff writers Nick Rhodes, Kristi Tousignant, Kyle Goon and Adele Hampton contributed to this report. slivnick@umdbk.com |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 05:29 PM Post #10 |
|
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2010/03/false-rape-report-ignites-discussion.html Thursday, March 4, 2010 False rape report ignites discussion -- but it's not the discussion that's needed A crime was committed at Penn State. So how does the campus community react to it? By talking about a completely different crime, of course. The crime that was committed was making a false rape report. But the university community has decided to use this incident as an occasion to foment hysteria about a different crime -- you guessed it -- rape. You know the routine: an actual rape didn't occur, but why waste the fear the false rape report instilled in our community when we can use it to scare people about rape? (Has anyone ever seen "The Music Man," and how he concocted "trouble in River City" due to the presence of a pool table?) So they talk about beefing up safety to prevent rape and all that. Funny that no gives a damn about preventing false rape claims, isn't it? The news story about the university's reaction (below) cites women's center executive director Ann Ard who said: "It [a false rape claim] doesn't happen enough to draw any conclusions." Sigh. Ms. Ard needs to spend several weeks reading through the objective information on this website to help her "draw some conclusions." Funny, she does this for a living and isn't familiar with Kanin or the other studies? Ms. Ard, you may recall, previously commented on the Austin Scott rape case. You remember that case, involving a Penn State football player accused of rape: "Charges against Scott were withdrawn when the accuser, identified in court documents as Desiree Minder of Pottsville, chose not to proceed with legal action after the state Superior Court ruled evidence of the acquittal of the student she accused of rape at another college could be used at trial." See here. What did Ms. Ard say about the Scott case? "Anne Ard of the Women's Resource Center said people shouldn't challenge an alleged victim who has been assaulted more than once. Ard said statistics show about one-third of sexual assault victims are assaulted multiple times. Researchers believe that's because of victims' vulnerability, and attackers' ability to prey on them. Ard said people should encourage these victims who continue to seek justice, even though it seems the system might have let them down in the past." http://www.wjactv.com/news/14418750/detail.html (Um, never mind that the accused student in the previous case was not found guilty.) Anyway, here's the depressing story about the false rape that is used to foment yet more rape hysteria, as if there isn't enough already: False rape report ignites discussion Innovation Park and Penn State officials will meet today to discuss increasing security, two days after a woman lied to police about being raped. The woman, who works for a private firm in the Lubert Building, told Penn State Police she was attacked by a man in a black ski mask at about 8:30 p.m. Monday on a parking lot snowbank. Further investigation proved the report false, but officials have recognized the need to discuss security measures. "We don't want anybody to panic. We want to be vigilant," said Thor Wasbotten, Assistant Dean for Student Media and Online Operations. Wasbotten, who said he will attend the meeting on behalf of the College of Communications, said the recent incident brought up the issue of safety at Innovation Park but added that stricter security is not definite. For now, Wasbotten's goal is raising awareness about safety at Innovation Park. He said students should be more cautionary and use buddy systems when working at the location late at night. And for a complex that stays open until 11 p.m. five nights a week, the idea of increased security is welcomed. Laura Shay (senior-broadcast journalism) said she wouldn't mind having more thorough security measures at Innovation Park, even though safety is already promoted. "You can't be too safe," said Shay, who works 5 p.m. to 11 p.m. Sunday and Tuesday nights. "They couldn't do anything that could hurt us out here. It could really only help -- make it better than it already is." Prior to Monday's report, a Penn State student told Penn State Police Feb. 3 that a man shook her hand outside of the Outreach Building and wouldn't let go. And after years of studying at Innovation Park without incident, Shay said finding out about the rape was odd and confusing -- feelings that only intensified when she discovered it was a hoax. "Who would make something that up?" she said. "It's not even funny to joke about that." Anne Ard, Centre County Women's Resource Center (CCWRC) executive director, also found the situation to be no laughing matter. During the 13 years she has worked at the CCWRC, she has never dealt with an incident similar to Monday's. "I haven't heard any reasoning behind it," she said. "It doesn't happen enough to draw any conclusions." Ard said in the future, students should pay more attention to their surroundings and take more precautions when traveling alone. Like Wasbotten said, it's all about awareness. "Just because this was a false alarm doesn't mean it wasn't a real test," Wasbotten said. "Does everybody have their guard up when this happens? Absolutely. Does everyone need to put their guard down when it's false? No." |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 4 2010, 08:57 PM Post #11 |
|
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2010/03/fbi_opens_two_new_civil_rights.html FBI confirms two new investigations into conduct of New Orleans police after Katrina By Brendan McCarthy, The Times-Picayune March 04, 2010, 10:24AM The FBI confirmed Thursday morning that it has opened two other civil rights investigations into the post-Katrina actions of New Orleans police officers, adding to a growing list of inquiries. The FBI now has at least seven active civil rights probes into the New Orleans Police Department. Sheila Thorne, spokeswoman for the FBI's field office in New Orleans, said Thursday that federal agents are examining the fatal shooting of Danny Brumfield Sr. and the non-fatal shooting of Keenon McCann. Thorne said these cases are two of "a number of highly publicized, potential civil rights matters" of interest to the FBI. The circumstances of both shootings, as well as the ensuing cursory NOPD investigations, were first detailed in a series published in The Times-Picayune in December, in partnership with the nonprofit investigative newsroom ProPublica and PBS' "Frontline." The NOPD's spokesman did not respond to a request for comment Thursday. Brumfield, 45, was fatally shot on Sept. 3, 2005, in front of the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center. Police said Brumfield inexplicably leaped onto the hood of a moving police cruiser and tried to attack the officers inside, making a "stabbing motion" with a pair of scissors. An officer in the passenger seat fired a single blast from his pistol-grip Mossberg shotgun, a personal weapon, killing Brumfield with a shot to his back. danny-brumfield.JPGLisa Krantz / San Antonion News via APPolice said Danny Brumfield, whose body is being removed from in front of the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center in September 2005, inexplicably leaped onto the hood of a moving police cruiser and tried to attack the officers inside. His family alleges that Brumfield was only trying to flag down the officers. They say police purposely struck him with the vehicle, then shot him. The ensuing NOPD investigation was incomplete at best: police never collected or found the scissors, officers lost crime scene photos, and detectives based their case on the statements made by the officers involved, failing to talk to civilian witnesses. A homicide detective never read the autopsy, which showed Brumfield had a shotgun wound to the back. The other new FBI investigation centers on the shooting of Keenon McCann, 28. He was shot on Sept. 1, 2005 on the Interstate 10 overpass near the Superdome by members of the NOPD's SWAT team. Capt. Jeff Winn, Lt. Dwayne Scheuermann and other officers acted on a tip that somebody had stolen a Kentwood Springs bottled water truck and was luring in thirsty flood victims, attacking and raping them. keenon-mccann.JPGTimes-Picayune archiveKeenon McCann was shot on Sept. 1, 2005, on the Interstate 10 overpass near the Superdome by members of the NOPD's SWAT team. The officers found several Kentwood Springs trucks parked on the overpass. They also allegedly found McCann, who "appeared to be observing the oncoming officers as if he was laying in wait for them" and was planning "to shoot one of those officers as they approached," Winn later told a detective. Both Winn and Scheuermann fired their assault rifles, hitting McCann. Though dozens of people were on the bridge, police interviewed no civilian witnesses or additional police officers. The investigation relied on the statements of Winn and Scheuerman. The gun that was allegedly in McCann's hand was never found. McCann survived the shooting and later filed a federal civil lawsuit against the NOPD. He was murdered outside his girlfriend's house in August 2008. That case remains open. The NOPD has not released details of the death, such as a possible motive or suspect. Recently, Winn and Scheuermann have emerged as central figures in the federal probe of possible police misconduct in the case of Henry Glover, according to sources and a criminal defense attorney. Witnesses say Glover, of Algiers, died in police custody at an Algiers elementary school, the SWAT team's makeshift compound, one day after the McCann shooting. Glover's charred remains were later pulled out of a scorched Chevrolet Malibu near the 4th District police station. Federal investigators believe he was shot by a police officer prior to arriving at the SWAT compound. The "Law & Disorder" series chronicled the Brumfield and McCann shootings, as well as the fatal police shooting of Matthew McDonald in Faubourg Marigny. The FBI confirmed last month that it had opened an investigation into McDonald's death. McDonald, 41, a Connectictut native, was fatally shot in the back on Sept. 3, 2005, by a NOPD officer in the Faubourg Marigny. Officers said they observed McDonald carrying a "handgun and a bottle containing an unknown liquid" in a white plastic bag. The police report doesn't explain how the police could tell the bag contained a gun. Lt. Bryant Wininger, armed with an assault rifle, commanded McDonald to drop the sack, but McDonald ignored the order and "reached into the bag in an attempt to remove a handgun," the police report said. Wininger, the report said, feared for his life and fired four shots in rapid sequence, the last two as McDonald lay on the ground. The officers said they then immediately rushed McDonald to West Jefferson Medical Center in Marrero. McDonald's family said police told them he died in a shooting and that the evidence had washed away. Last year, they first learned from a reporter that the NOPD had shot McDonald. The other active civil-rights probes into the department that have been confirmed by the FBI include: the Danziger Bridge police shooting; the death of Glover; the fatal police shooting of Adolph Grimes on Jan. 1, 2009; and the July 2005 death of Raymond Robair. Thorne, the FBI spokeswoman, said the agency asks that anyone with information on these incidents contact the FBI at 504.816.3000. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |







7:14 PM Jul 10