Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
The Tortmaster lists Nifong's actions
Topic Started: Mar 7 2010, 04:17 PM (314 Views)
Quasimodo

(the following pages concerning the actions of Durham DA Mike Nifong accidentally slipped out of the TORTMASTER's briefcase and were photographed by passersby before they could be returned.)

(REPOST)


We really need to sit down and have a chat about some of the problems discussed in the succeeding paragraphs:

A. Not searching 610 Buchanan for 2 days. If there is a rape, search the crime scene within minutes of finding out about the alleged rape. I know this is mainly a LE problem in Durham, but you took on the mantle of leading the investigation, so the buck stops with you on this.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0329061duke1.html (note date of search warrant of 3/16/06)

B. The warrant-less search of Edens Dorm. You had your police officers questioning lax players when you knew they were represented by counsel. This is not Russia, this is not Abu Ghraib. There are constitutional rights to be protected and constitutional safeguards to follow. By this time, you were in charge, and you knew what you were doing. Shame on you!

http://www.wral.com/news/8690476/detail.html (where CF & RS lived).

C. Indicting w/o DNA. You couldn't wait, could you? The primary was coming up, you were faced with frenzied questions at NCCU campaign forums, and you needed an indictment. A good prosecutor would wait until an investigation is completed before indicting. You not only failed to wait to complete the investigation, you didn't even wait for the DNA. Huge mistake.

D. Favorable bond treatment for Roberts. Didn't I read somewhere that you personally signed off on the favorable bond treatment for Kim Roberts? That was very generous of you! On the other hand, you weren't so generous with Elmo or the noise violators, were you? Sickening favoritism, yes; witness tampering, maybe.

E. Arrest of Cabbie. To have your two lead Duke rape hoax detectives pick up Elmo for a very old misdemeanor warrant, while trying to pressure him into changing his story, and then prosecuting the lamest criminal case (save the actual Duke rape hoax case) was pure Gestapo/Orwellian tactics. And your weak excuse about checking warrants on witnesses in criminal cases is sooooooo bad. You are trying to tell me that your business is so slow that you can look up warrants on witnesses in cases that won't be tried for almost another year, but you don't have time to provide discovery to the defense or draft written responses to their motions.

[However, it wasn't Sooooooo bad that any of the media picked up on it and questioned Nifong about his obvious Orwellian tactic. All this was happening right before their eyes and they couldn't/wouldn't ask a single hard question about it. The Duke case is another great moment in the history of American journalism....NOT.[/big][/big]

BTW, this also happened in full view of the NAACP, the ACLU, and the Justice Department. And not a peep out of any of them...]


http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/438757.html

F. Revocation of probation of other lax players. This sure smacks of the juvenile, vindictive nature we've been talking about. By this time, you must have known that no player was going to step forward. You must have known your case sucked. Yet, you did it anyway.

http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/437539.html ; http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/432463.html .

G. Failure to turn over Precious' cellphone. Were you trying to hide evidence, the call by Precious to the escort service? Or, were you just ignorant when you stated that the cellphone could not contain exculpatory evidence? In either event, it looks bad for you.

http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/441262.html

H. Indicating date rape drug knowing no date rape was found in any toxicology tests. Was this just a weak attempt to float a sagging case? Was it a purposeful misstatement? This would have been (if true) the most important evidence that you had, but you didn't even have it (or you didn't look at your file to know you didn't have it). Again, in either event, it makes you look bad.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,196631,00.html ; http://www.wral.com/dukelacrosseheadlines/9256654/detail.html

I. DA inciting anger in AA community & liberal college community. Why did you call the boys "hooligans" and tacitly approve of posters with all the boys' faces on them? It served your political purposes, but did it serve justice? Of course, meeting with the NBPP and showing them your evidence was a new low. Did you have an authorization and release from Precious before you showed the NBPP Precious' medical records? There are professional rules of responsibility that you must adhere to. When you equated this case (before an investigation had barely started) with murders and cross burnings, I believe you violated those ethical obligations.

http://www.wral.com/dukelacrosseheadlines/9150043/detail.html ; http://www.wral.com/dukelacrosseheadlines/9133291/detail.html (NBPP marching)

J. DA’s failure to meet w/Defense attorneys. Another ethical obligation that you ignored. Additionally, you had every tactical reason to listen to the attorneys. Why not see what their evidence was? If it was solid, you would at least have had the advantage of knowing all about it much sooner.

http://www.wral.com/dukelacrosseheadlines/8751211/detail.html

K. Ordering media to stay off public floor of county building. I know the media got pretty intense, but you brought it on yourself, now didn't you? Did you think you had the authority to order the free press to stay off a floor of a public, county building? This also seems very Gestapo/Orwellian.

http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/438590.html

L. Waiting more than a month to search Finnerty's dorm room. I don't think this is an ethical violation, but it sure makes you and LE look like a bunch of Bozos. What if a real crime had been committed? Do you calendar searches out a month in advance in all your cases?

http://www.wral.com/dukelacrosseheadlines/8855428/detail.html

M. Yelling/cussing at a female lawyer, smirking in courtroom. Now, this does involve some professional integrity issues. I can't wait to see you directing the testimony of Kim Roberts. I hope she flips you the birdie, then I would like you to cuss her out. At that point, if we can end with both of you sticking your tongues out at each other, perfecto!

N. Condom use and 5 minute rape. You have completely contradicted your complainant's police statements. At the next hearing, I expect you to call Precious a "liar, liar, pants on fire." You have to have a good faith basis to make these statements. That is especially true when you contradict your own case. Where is the proof of condom use?

[And I'm still waiting for anyone in the Durham media to put forth an analysis like the above. This case--and the possible wrongful imprisonment of three innocent students--might have been derailed if a SINGLE EDITORIAL had been written bringing the above actions to the attention of the public. But nobody in the Durham media seemed to have cared about
whether or not innocent people were wrongly convicted. They just voted--with their coverage/lack thereof--to keep the circus going. ]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sceptical

Here's my version from Talk Left on December 14, 2006:

“BILL OF PARTICULARS” FOR MICHAEL NIFONG

A. Actions subverting the legal system
1) Suggesting that potential defendants do not need lawyers
2) Declining to meet with defendants’ lawyers
3) Refusing to review exculpatory evidence
4) Improperly directing a police investigation instead of the police chief
5) Organizing an illegal photo-ID lineup without “fillers”
6) Indicting before fully investigating by going straight to the grand jury instead of having a probable cause hearing
7) Inflaming public opinion with over 50 interviews
8) Pursuing the case despite inconclusive DNA and forensic evidence
9) Declining to consider polygraph evidence
10) Delaying production of discovery material including police notes, phone and computer records, and DNA evidence
11) Failing to personally interview the accuser to determine credibility of the charges
12) Attempting to place burden of proof on defendants
13) Declining to produce a bill of particulars and giving changing theories of the “crime”
14) Deciding to prosecute the case personally to curry political favor with the black community
15) Attempting to tamper with witnesses by inducements (Kim Roberts) and threats (Mr. Elmostafa)
16) Stating “if a case is of such significance that people in the community are divided or up in arms over the existence of that case, then that in and of itself is an indication that a case needs to be tried,” improperly suggesting that community needs trump justice
17) Engaging in a conspiracy to withhold exculpatory DNA evidence from the defense, in violation of discovery and other laws

B. Misleading and/or lying to the public
1) Falsely stating identity of 911 caller who reported racial slurs was unknown, thereby inciting racial tensions
2) Falsely claiming use of condoms despite known contrary statements from accuser
3) Falsely suggesting use of date rape drug
4) Demonstrating choke-hold despite never interviewing accuser
5) Discussing “scratches” and shirts on players’ arms
6) Calling players “hooligans” and declaring definitely that a rape happened at the party
7) Stating DNA evidence would identify the guilty players then backtracking
8) Claiming players not cooperating after captains came in voluntarily and helped with house search by police

C. Inappropriate Conduct
1) Shouting and swearing at a female defense attorney and others
2) Accusing lawyers for unindicted players of being disappointed their clients were not indicted
3) Demeaning defense attorneys in court
4) Smirking, laughing, and making insulting gestures in court
5) Inciting racial tensions by dealing with the National Black Panther Party (NBPP) and not denouncing its racist and anti-semitic views
6) Insulting Duke students by talking about “rich daddies” even though 40% of Duke students receive financial assistance.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

So far he lost his job, lost his bar license(who would hire him anyway?), received one day in the local jail, and retired with a big fat pension!

He belongs in prison.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bill Anderson
Member Avatar

Baldo
Mar 7 2010, 09:55 PM
So far he lost his job, lost his bar license(who would hire him anyway?), received one day in the local jail, and retired with a big fat pension!

He belongs in prison.



Amen to that. Here is a guy who flouted the law, openly committed crimes, and now feels sorry for himself and has Sidney Harr carrying his dirty water. What a pathetic POS. I cannot wait to watch him beg for his license in two years.

:bill:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

presented by the TORTMASTER after having reviewed the amazing colossal binder

REPOST :

for the edification of newcomers and those whose cerebral hard drives may have had to be replaced since 2006


----------------------------


The State Bar Hearing evidence binder is full of fun facts and trivia!

Did you know this:
Himan got around to contacting the girls that Reade contacted on March 13, 2006 almost exactly one year later? Himan called one girl on March 9, 2007 and another on March 15, 2007. See State Bar Hearing Evidence Binder, at p. 583 et seq. Is this coincidence or divine intervention? I disagree with the pot-smoking karma-carping throng; rather, I say it is crappy police work.

In an interview with our good friend Jarriel Johnson, the driver told Himan that he drove Mangum to the "Crazy Horse" back in September 2005, and that he had known her for four years. Id. at 575.

This is interesting information because some time later, when Mangum was being interviewed by Coman and Winstead (with Himan present), Precious told the attorneys that she started dancing in February 2006 by calling Tammy out of the phone book, and, at that time, Tammy hooked her up with the Platinum Club. Did Himan have a duty to tell Coman and Winstead about this lie? If so, did he? That lie had worked so well for Precious in fooling Samiha Khanna, but for Coman and Winstead -- not so good.

Himan took some notes of his telephone conversation with Tara Levicy, which show how far some people will violate laws just to push the metanarrative:

3/16/06 11:01 HRS -- RECEIVED CALL FROM MS. LEVICY. SHE STATED THAT DUE TO (HIPPA) LAWS SHE WAS UNABLE TO DIVULGE PATIENT INFORMATION BUT STATED THAT THERE WERE SIGNS CONSISTENT WITH A SEXUAL ASSAULT DURING HER TEST.

It is almost childish how the Himan and Gottlieb notes are soooooo self-serving. Even then, they are damning to the DPD. It has occurred to me that, like the bar hearing depositions, there may be things left out of the evidence binder just because it was not relevant to the specific Nifong ethical violations. Have we only seen the hump of this whale? I agree that there are no issues of fact for a civil jury, and, after having looked at the law, there ain't many defenses left for the bad guys. Floyd agrees.

One of the more interesting issues I will be following in the civil case deals with Mangum's attempts to get out of Durham Access. Based upon Himan's self-serving and Nifong-serving notes, Mariecia Smith of Durham Access believed that Mangum had left her children unattended the night of the Duke Hoax. In reading between the lines of these notes, it can be seen that Precious played the "single mother and my children need me" card really hard. I bet that, when Ms. Smith's deposition is taken, it will become apparent that Precious was fishing for any way to get out of Durham Access. When the "think of the children" ploy didn't work, Mangum concentrated on the false accusation of rape. MOO!

More Arcane Junk from the Binder:

1. Neighbor Interviewed! It took more than a year, but finally, on March 30, 2007, Benjamin Himan interviewed a neighbor other than Jason Bissey. What was the crucial evidence uncovered by the detective? The lax players were "bad parkers." This is from his notes, I swear to God:

Quote
"His only problem that he noticed on a regular occurrence is that none of them knew how to park a car."


State Bar Hearing Evidence Binder, at p. 585. Seriously, this goes to show how shoddy the investigation was. The thought bubble over the civil juror's head will read: "You waited over a year to talk to a freaking neighbor? I wish this detective would speak up -- has he got a ferret stuck in his throat?"

2. Mangum's Reaction. Prior to her last meeting with the AG's office, Mangum said she was taking Ambien. Himan got her 3 Mountain Dews before and during the interview. After the Attorney General's office shut down the meeting because of Precious' apparent impairment, and on the ride home, she told Himan "that she had messed up again." See id. at 586-87.

Now, what does Precious seem to do whenever she messes up? Well, she keels over, of course. That is what happened in this instance. When Himan got her back home, she "fainted" on the front steps. Himan had to call the paramedics. Subsequently, Precious stated that her doctor told her she had "overdosed" on pills. See id.

That is a classic Mangum reaction
. But there is more. Himan told Precious that the Attorney General was going to make a statement about the case. That day, Precious stalled and stalled and stalled a scheduled meeting with the AG's office. My reaction to her reaction is this: Did she think she was going to be arrested that day? I bet she did. She told Himan later, "I don't think I am going to show up today." Id. at p. 588. Also, she hung up on him on two occasions that day. Himan did not use the phrase "hung up" elsewhere in his notes, even though he talked to many witnesses, including Precious, by telephone.

I believe the civil jury will hear about Mangum's response to stress situations. A response that DPD failed to understand or predict. Also, I think a civil jury will be very interested in learning about all the funds spent on Mangum, including the Victim Fund monies for housing and other sundries. In that vein, the jury will also see how pampered she was by Himan and others. Contrast that to the treatment received by Elmo. MO
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeZPU

All excellent stuff here -- thanks for posting! The Tortmaster rocks!

I would just clarify Pt. 8 in Section A of the Nifong Bill of Particulars:


Quote:
 
8) Pursuing the case despite inconclusive DNA and forensic evidence


Just a minor sticky point: I would replace "inconclusive" with "no supporting"

The DNA evidence was actually fairly conclusive that a rape had not occurred, that no LAX player had even touched Mangum, let alone sexually assaulted her.

I am also glad that the Tortmaster pointed out Mangum's repeated use of on-the-spot feinting spells, whenever she was in a jam.

She feigned unconsciousness when the police chase of her with the stolen cab finally ended, in the Kroger's parking lot with Officer Shelton, and on the day of the AG's Declaration of Innocence (as described in Himan's notes)

AND apparently she did it again on the day of her recent arrest (it was reported here that she was taken out in a gurney).

Again, this is the person that the DPD put its entire reputation on the line for, all the way up to Lt. CoP Ron Hodge.
Edited by MikeZPU, Mar 8 2010, 01:47 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nyesq83
Member Avatar

Speculation here:

Did Mangum receive government assistance for her children in March 2006? Would that support cease if Mangum was committed and the children taken from her?

At any rate, she is so selfish (and drug-addicted) that she would go to any length to keep from being committed.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

nyesq83
Mar 8 2010, 01:43 PM
Speculation here:

Did Mangum receive government assistance for her children in March 2006? Would that support cease if Mangum was committed and the children taken from her?

At any rate, she is so selfish (and drug-addicted) that she would go to any length to keep from being committed.

There has always been speculation that her primary motivation for claiming rape was to prevent being charged with D&D (drunk and disorderly) and thereby losing her kids. Remember the initial police radio transmission from the Kroger parking lot.

Kroger security guard 911 call
http://www.newsobserver.com/content/multimedia/flash_audio/20060328_911a.mp3

http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2006_04_01_archive.html

1:25 a.m., The first officer, Sgt. J.C. Shelton, to arrive at the Kroger tells the dispatcher: "She's 10-56 and unconscious." The radio code 10-56 means an intoxicated person. The dispatcher asks: "You need a medic truck or are you 10-4?" Sgt. Shelton replies: "She's breathing, appears to be fine, she's not in distress. She's just passed out drunk."

The accuser was unconscious in the passenger seat of the car driven by the second dancer at the party.

"She was wearing a see-through red outfit, with no undergarments and one white high heel shoe," Shelton wrote. "She was unconscious."

Shelton says he got an ammonia capsule from his patrol car.

"When I used it, the female began mouth-breathing, which is a sign that she was not really unconscious," he wrote. "My experience is that unconscious people wake up rather quickly when exposed to ammonia capsules.

"I grabbed the female and attempted to pull her from the vehicle. She grabbed the emergency brake with her left hand and would not come out of the car. At this point, I applied a bent wrist come-along [maneuver] to her right-hand arm? once she was out of the car, I released the pressure and she collapsed to the ground."

Shelton says the woman would not speak with police officers, so they decided to take her for involuntary commitment at the Durham Access Center.

About 1:4? a.m., Two other officers arrive. Officer Barfield takes the accuser to Durham Access, a county-run facility for detoxification, because of her inebriated state and she met the criteria for involuntary commitment. Officer Joseph M. Stewart followed Officer Barfield to Durham Access to assist him if needed.


Your point about the kids possibly being of financial importance to her is certainly a logical consideration.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply