- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Blog and Media Roundup - Friday, March 12, 2010; News Roundup | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 12 2010, 06:13 AM (771 Views) | |
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:13 AM Post #1 |
|
http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story/6673104/article-Courtroom-showdown-leads-to-street-gunfire?instance=homefifthleft Courtroom showdown leads to street gunfire 03.11.10 - 08:25 pm Man shot after verbal confrontation spills out of courthouse onto Parrish Street By John McCann and Keith Upchurch jmccann@heraldsun; 419-6601 kupchurch@heraldsun.com; 419-6612 DURHAM -- A war of words among Bull City rivals inside the Durham County Judicial Building on Thursday spilled into the streets and resulted in a morning shooting. The shooting happened near a Parrish Street restaurant, just across from the downtown courthouse. Police blocked off the area for a while. The unidentified shooter remained at large Thursday. Durham County Sheriff's Office Lt. Paul Hornbuckle, who heads up courthouse security, said the rivals exchanged words in District Court Judge Brian Wilks' courtroom. The judge said he'd find folks in contempt of court if they couldn't act appropriately. When things started escalating, Durham County Sheriff's Office Sgt. Calvin Brooks told the young men to leave, Hornbuckle said. They left, but the verbal sparring continued down the courthouse steps, Hornbuckle said. Gunfire from a car wounded one of the men. The Durham Police Department responded to the reported shooting about 11 a.m. It occurred in the 100 block of East Parrish Street. The victim said shots were fired from a gold-colored vehicle with tinted windows. The victim, who was shot in the foot, was taken to Duke Hospital for treatment. Police said his injuries don't appear to be life-threatening. "No courthouse is immune from such activity," Durham Police Chief Jose Lopez said. The shooting did not occur inside the courthouse, but Hornbuckle said his deputies do their best to maintain security there. Like Lopez, though, Hornbuckle said there are no guarantees. Metal detectors are used at the entrances of the courthouse, and the gun fired in the shooting doesn't appear to have made it inside the building, Hornbuckle said. The police chief said it was too early to be sure the shooting was gang-related. He said it "involved disconnected youth." Lopez said the gunfire apparently came from a car, but he said it wasn't immediately clear if the car was parked or moving. "We're on top of the investigation," Lopez added. Anyone with information about the shooting is asked to call Investigator Andrew C. Rogers at 560-4935, ext. 29416 or Durham CrimeStoppers at 683-1200. Those leaving the courthouse after the shooting seemingly joked about whether it was safe to go outside. But a sheriff's deputy said those inquiring really were scared. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:14 AM Post #2 |
|
http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story_news_durham/6674188/article-Man-slain-late-Thursday-at-East-Durham-tienda?instance=main_article Man slain late Thursday at East Durham tienda 03.11.10 - 10:28 pm By Mark Donovan mdonovan@heraldsun.com; 419-6655 DURHAM -- Details were sketchy late Thursday night, but a police spokesman confirmed that a man had been murdered in East Durham earlier in the night. The police watch commander' reported just before 11 p.m. that investigators were on the scene and questioning witnesses. A witness said the body of the victim was covered with a sheet in front of the East Durham tienda Latin American Foods, 2502 Holloway St., near Junction Road, shortly after 9 p.m. The watch commander confirmed that the shooting did take place at that location. Holloway Street in that area is also known as N.C. 98 or the Wake Forest Highway. The neighborhood is about three blocks east of U.S. 70, and just east of the railroad tracks. Unconfirmed reports indicated that the suspected killer had turned himself in to police after fleeing the scene, but the watch commander said no one had been charged as of 10:54 p.m. He also said he could not yet reveal the cause of death. The slaying was the second this week on Holloway Street. On Monday night, Rayshaun Cotton, 29, of Garrett Road was driving west on Holloway, about 11 blocks west of Thursday night's shooting, when he was shot several times and apparently crashed into a tree near Guthrie Avenue. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:15 AM Post #3 |
|
http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story_news_durham/6673142/article-Shooting-victim-dies--police-probe-continues?instance=main_article Shooting victim dies; police probe continues 03.11.10 - 08:31 pm By KEITH UPCHURCH kupchurch@heraldsun.com; 419-6612 DURHAM -- A driver who was shot Monday and crashed into a tree on Holloway Street near Guthrie Avenue in East Durham has died, police said. The victim, Rayshaun Cotton, died about 1:05 p.m. Wednesday at Duke University Hospital, according to Durham police spokeswoman Kimberle Walker. She said investigators are seeking information about another vehicle that reportedly was involved in a chase with Cotton's car before the crash. It is described as a light-colored, boxy style vehicle similar to an Oldsmobile Cutlass. It may have sustained damage during the chase. Police said Cotton, 29, of Garrett Road, was driving west on Holloway Street shortly before 9 p.m. when the crash occurred. Officers went to a disturbance with a weapon call at 8:53 p.m. and found Cotton's car had crashed into a tree. He had been shot several times and was taken to Duke for treatment of critical injuries. Durham Police Chief Jose Lopez said Thursday the death is being treated as a homicide. He said it apparently was not a random act. Anyone with information about the second vehicle or the incident is asking to call Cpl. Scott Pennica at 560-4440, ext. 29320 or CrimeStoppers at 683-1200. CrimeStoppers pays cash rewards for information leading to arrest in felonies. Callers never have to identify themselves. Cpl. Martin Walkowe with CrimeStoppers said Thursday he has received calls in connection with the case and has sent the information to investigators. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:18 AM Post #4 |
|
http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story/6670684/article-When-to-save--when-to-spend?instance=editorial When to save, when to spend 03.11.10 - 04:08 pm The city finance department is noodling over a plan to put off $8.3 million in debt. Durhamites can be forgiven if they shivered when they heard the news; the seed of our present economic mess was planted when the wizards of Wall Street tinkered with “sophisticated instruments” that “restructured” the normal (and inevitable) risks of debt. Don’t be scared. We look forward to seeing the final strategy for Durham’s debt — and we hope it will include a plan for how we will pay for it when the debt finally comes due. Others are not so confident. After the city voted to give away some of its assets — surplus vehicles that the city estimated were worth $25,500 — then indicated that taxes might increase and city employees might get a pay raise, some Durhamites started sharpening their knives. “How about the city doing the same as the rest of us and quit spending on anything other that doesn’t ‘keep the lights on,’” a poster with the screen name Tod.A.Puckett wrote on The Herald-Sun’s Web site. “Sorry, but no pay raise this year, no skate parks, no cute statues. ... Police, fire, garbage, water and any of the other necessities to live. Everything else has to wait.” We are troubled by the perception that the city is spending like a sailor on shore leave (although we continue to oppose council’s proposal for pay raises). City Manager Tom Bonfield presided over a cautious, lean budget last year and we anticipate the same for 2010-2011. He has reminded the council of real costs, noting that we don’t just pay debt service on most capital projects, but also have to budget for maintenance and operating expenses. Bonfield is right to keep sight of Durham’s long-term health. We encourage a conservative approach, but that doesn’t mean shutting off everything but cops, fire and garbage service. Sometimes it means spending when construction or services are cheap — one up-side of the recession — as an investment in the city. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:23 AM Post #5 |
|
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2010/03/from-archives-man-killed-woman-he.html Thursday, March 11, 2010 Boomerang: False rape claims sometimes come back to hurt the false accusers We frequently note that false rape claims often have terrible consequences for the falsely accused. They often have terrible consenquences for the loved ones of the falsely accused, too. And, yes, sometimes they have terrible consequences for false accusers. Some false accusers are arrested and jailed, and a small percentage are convicted and sent away for a sufficiently lengthy period that they won't forget the ordeal. This, of course, is not to suggest that false accusers in general are charged, convicted, or sentenced properly for their crimes. Not by a long stretch, and that is probably the most important change that needs to be brought about in the false rape milieu. A more common way of punishing false accusers is the trend of news outlets to report their names, which we, of course, applaud. Again, this is not to suggest that false accusers are identified by news outlets with sufficient frequency. Not by a long stretch. Too many refuse to identify false accusers; some, inexplicably, insist on calling them "victims." There is another type of harm to false accusers that is very, very rare, but it happens. Some false accusers are beaten and even murdered by the men they tried to destroy. While I am certain some of our readers will experience the momentary, unconscious inclination to applaud such acts of violence, we must reign in our passions lest we lower ourselves to the level of those man-hating monstrosities who applaud the imprisonment of males on the basis of rape accuasations without caring if the rape actually occurred. While we must never, ever advocate violence against anyone for telling a rape lie, still, we must raise the question that is surely at the forefront of every reader's mind: what did society expect would happen? When our justice system abandons an entire class of victim so that often the only "justice" or "mercy" they can hope for is their victimizers' recantations, is it at all surprising that a small percentage of victims would want to lash out at their victimizers? When the state refuses to do justice for a group of citizens and insists on treating them as collateral damage in the "more important" war on rape, when the state decides that the victimization of one class of citizens is more worthy of protection than another, is it at all surprising that a few of these forgotten, abandoned, ignored victims will take the law into their own hands to mete out the justice that the system refuses to provide? Which got me to thinking about a strange case from last year. Mohammed Ali lost his self-control and launched into a frenzied stabbing attack, leaving Yasmina Larbi-Cherif, 22, and her sister Sabrina, 19, dead. He was charged and convicted of murder and was sentenced to prison for life. But here is Ali's side of the story: Ali had been in an on-off sexual relationship with Yasmina since 2006 and impregnated her twice, but she terminated both pregnancies against his wishes. In February 2008, Ali was arrested after Yasmina made an allegation of rape against him. Ali claimed it was a false accusation. He then spent five months in custody before the case was dropped against him (she didn't want to pursue it). If, indeed, it was a false claim, for reasons known only to Ali, he resumed his relationship with her. Then one night, Ali claimed he and Yasmina started talking about her pregnancy terminations -- and about the time he spent in prison. According to Ali, Yasmina started laughing. “The more I talked about it she just laughed. I did not know what to do. I just snapped,” he said. According to the news account: "Ali said he then picked up a knife from a sink and stabbed Yasmina in the back. She fell to the floor. He then heard [her sister] Sabrina come into the flat and felt a blow to his head. He then hit Sabrina in the face with his elbow before stabbing her. He said he then dragged both the women’s bodies into the bedroom, stripped them and put them on to the bed." The judge rejected Ali's story and sentenced him to life in prison. The thought crosses my mind that Ali's version of the facts might have been just too disturbing, too subversive, for the judge to believe. Regular readers of this blog will understand the rage Ali must have felt if his version of the facts were true. But I can't help but read this as a cautionary tale. We do not condone violence or vigilante justice for false rape claims. But when women strip men of their liberty, their good names, their finances, and their dignity by falsely accusing them of rape, what more do those men have to live for? Is it a stretch to imagine that some of those men are going to snap and exact a justice that our legal system refuses to provide them? What is astounding is that there aren't a lot more news stories where this sort of thing happens. The way to prevent it from happening is to start treating the falsely accused with the same respect, the same dignity, that we show to rape victims. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:32 AM Post #6 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/03/12/383606/durham-shooting-follows-fight.html Published Fri, Mar 12, 2010 05:17 AM Modified Thu, Mar 11, 2010 09:52 PM Durham shooting follows fight in county courthouse DURHAM A man was hospitalized after being shot in the foot near the Durham County Courthouse late Thursday morning. The incident started about 11 a.m., when a fight broke out inside one of the courtrooms, Sheriff's Chief Deputy Mike Andrews said. Deputies escorted the involved parties out of the building through the courthouse's Parrish Street exit. The man was walking west on Parrish Street when shots were fired from a gold Hyundai, Andrews said. The pedestrian was taken to Duke Hospital. The area around Church and Parrish streets was temporarily closed after the shooting. No arrests had been made as of early Thursday afternoon. If you have information related to this incident, police ask you to call Investigator A.C. Rogers at 560-4935, ext. 29416, or Durham Crime Stoppers at 683-1200. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:38 AM Post #7 |
|
http://svanderwal.blogspot.com/2010/03/where-are-they-now.html Thursday, March 11, 2010 Where are they now?? Yesterday ESPN.com posted an article about the three Duke Lacrosse players that were wrongfully accused of rape in 2006. The article discusses where the boys are now and what they have been up to the past few years. This article come just weeks after the accuser, Crystal Gail Mangum, was arrested on numerous charges ranging from child endangerment to arson and fraud. One thing that hasn't really come to light is the fate of the prosecuter, Mike Nifong. When searching you can find that Nifong was " disbarred for dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation, making Nifong the first prosecutor in North Carolina history to lose his law license based on actions in a case. Nifong was found guilty of criminal contempt and served one day in jail." Interesting that this has missed main-stream news. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:40 AM Post #8 |
|
http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=4644 Santa Clara County Hospital Still Withholding Exculpatory Evidence in Sexual Assault Allegations March 11th, 2010 by Robert Franklin, Esq. No sooner have we finished with Santa Clara Deputy District Attorney Ben Field's suspension from the practice of law due to prosecutorial misconduct, but this comes across our desk (San Jose Mercury News, 3/11/10). Last year I reported on a Santa Clara Hospital that the county's prosecutors used to analyze evidence in cases of alleged sexual abuse. Back then some 3,000 videotapes of examinations of alleged sexual assault victims came to light. It seems that the woman who conducted the examinations recorded them as well. She didn't tell prosecutors about the tapes, and when they found out about them, they, er, neglected to inform defense attorneys. One man's conviction was overturned and apparently "dozens" of others may be. Now, Attorneys have uncovered a second, critical trove of evidence that has been withheld for years by medical investigators in hundreds of Santa Clara County sex-assault cases, prompting a wholesale review of procedures at the county's public hospital. The emergence Tuesday of previously unknown forms documenting interactions between medical personnel and suspected victims comes after prosecutors discovered more than 3,000 videotaped medical exams of children last year that were also improperly withheld from the accused. So once again possibly exculpatory evidence has been withheld from defendants in alleged sex crime cases. And just like in the Ben Field case, we hear echoes of the Duke Lacrosse case. Here's how it works: Prosecutors are required by law to turn over exculpatory evidence in their possession to defendants and their attorneys. But the key words there are "in their possession." In the Duke case, tissue samples had been collected and DA Mike Nifong sent that material, not to a state-run laboratory, but to a private one. That way, the tests could be conducted and if they indicated guilt, the lab reports could be given to the DA who would then turn them over to the defense. But if they indicated innocence, the results stayed in private hands. Therefore, the DA's office would not have exculpatory evidence "in its possession," and therefore it wouldn't be required to turn it over to the defense. It maintained "plausible deniability." The same thing looks to have been happening in Santa Clara County, which is why, Two years ago, an appellate court ruled that the hospital examiners were part of the "prosecution team," making the District Attorney's Office responsible for ensuring that evidence is turned over to defendants. By adjudicating the hospital officials to be, in effect, an arm of the DA's office, the court was trying to prevent prosecutors from doing what Mike Nifong had done - hiding evidence from the defense in a purportedly neutral place. What's now come to light are intake forms in which people alleging sexual victimization tell hospital personnel what happened. Obviously, in some cases, their statements then could tend to prove the innocence of a person subsequently charged. Interestingly, hospital personnel who are part of the Sexual Assault Response Team continue to stonewall not only defense lawyers but prosecutors as well. Last year, when the scandal about the withheld videotapes came to light, prosecutors swore that there was no other missing evidence beyond the tapes. That was because hospital personnel had told them that. Now that turns out once again to have been false. One defense attorney, Michael Kresser, praised prosecutors for acting quickly, but expressed concern about their lack of knowledge about Sexual Assault Response Team procedures, including the existence of the forms. In other words, this time it's not prosecutors who are subverting justice and putting innocent defendants behind bars, it's nurses and other hospital personnel. And it seems only to be a problem in allegations of sex crimes. Here's my guess: someone at the hospital (and it may be several "someones") is a "believe the woman" adherent. That is, there's someone who's swallowed whole the notion that women or children who complain of sexual abuse can't lie. Therefore, since all allegations must be true, withholding exulpatory evidence is acceptable because it jails a man who's guilty even if there's evidence tending to show he's not. I'd put money on it; there's one of those (or more) at Valley Medical Center in Santa Clara County, California. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 06:42 AM Post #9 |
|
http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-carmel-hazing-prosecutor-interview-031110,0,7785264.story WXIN One-on-one with the Hamilton County Prosecutor Fox59 News reporter Kimberly King speaks exclusively with Hamilton County Prosecutor Sonia Leerkamp, who will determine if criminal charges will be filed against members of the Carmel High School basketball team. Kimberly King Fox59.com 5:08 PM EST, March 11, 2010 CARMEL, IN Only on Fox59 News, the Hamilton County Prosecutor is speaking about the secrecy surrounding the alleged Carmel basketball players sexual assault case. It was three weeks ago the story broke and the investigation began. Fox59 News reporter Kimberly King sat down exclusively with Prosecutor Sonia Leerkamp, who will determine if criminal charges will be filed in this case. She said it could be a matter of days or weeks, but one thing Sonia wants viewers to know is there is secrecy for a reason: to protect the victims. And that's where we began our conversation with her. NOTE: Below is the interview, with uncut, and unedited answers from both reporter Kim King and the prosecutor. Reporter Kimberly King: "At the heart of it are the victims have you spoke to them how are they doing?" Prosecutor Sonia Leerkamp: "It's my understanding they are doing about as well as can be expected. I know the parents of the victims are taking measures to make sure those individuals are receiving proper care and support and things of that nature." King: "The perception in the public is there has been a veil of secrecy from Carmel police to school officials, what would you say about how this case has been handled by police and school from your years as prosecutor in Hamilton County?" Leerkamp: "Well first of all, I think both doing very best to respond to situation and the other thing I really want your viewers to focus on is, what if this was your child? Whether your child was the victim or yours who was the potential accused, how much would you want out there in the public for everyone to be making judgments on what happened to your particular child? "Prosecutors have to be very sensitized to people jumping to judgment because they have part of the information before they've concluded a formal investigation, and we haven't even made a determination in this case that a crime has occurred." "And it is particularly difficult when you have a lot of people to interview and you have people, sometimes memories can be distorted about what they've heard, as opposed to what they actually remember seeing. So police have to be meticulous about their investigation and guarding against those kinds of influences." King: "One of alleged victims came forward weeks after January 22nd (the date of the alleged hazing incident on the Carmel freshman basketball bus). Can you give our viewers an idea of why that happened and why the delay?" Leerkamp: "We did talk yesterday about me making any comments specifically about this investigation and I wont do that. But I will talk in general about these types of allegations and that it is not unusual at all for a young person to delay reporting. There are so many factors that weigh into how a young person processes what has happened to them.Sometimes they don't even understand that what may have happened may be a crime. They also don't want the stigma to attach that comes from making a formal report." "It can involve stigma of other kids making fun of them or ostracizing them because they've made such a report. All of those things are particularly sensitive when you have adolescent individual involved and processing what should I do with what's happened to me." We talked with Leerkamp about a range of subjects related to the Carmel sexual hazing allegations. She reiterated she would not discuss specific testimony police have on what happened on the freshman team's bus, but she fully supported Carmel Police Department's decision to black out much of the alleged details in the victim's report that also has the date blacked out. King: "Would you have redacted a similar way, you know what, in blacked out areas?" Leerkamp: "You know, when a case still in status of just allegations I don't think anyone's entitled to know anything." King: "Have you heard of any indication of financial influence possibly a scholarship to a private school to silence one of these victims?" Leerkamp: "Absolutely not" "There have been between 30 and 60 interviews done so far. I met with police on this case Monday to get a sense of who had been interviewed and whether a need for additional re-interviews of some of those individuals." King: "Does the evidence indicate there could be additional incidents investigated?" Leerkamp: "I'm not going to answer that question." (Leerkamp indicated she is not allowed to talk about specifics of the case until if and when criminal charges are file) King: "Is there any indication racial motivation in the case?" Leerkamp: "No, not at all." King: "Where do you feel you are right now, close? Days weeks?" Leerkamp: "I kind of feel like we're still in the middle of assessing everything so." King: "Days or weeks?" Leerkamp: "Days or weeks it could be either one. I think I told you about the analogy to the Duke lacrosse case and how that can blow up in your face if all your decisions tend to be motivated by publicity or public desire to hear a decision and I don't want to operate like that especially in a case where children may be victims." King: "Why do you think this is such a highly charged case?" Leerkamp: "I think anytime you have allegations of things happening within a school, it becomes very highly charged because you have the public perceiving school is a safe place for their child to be and they want to be able to trust the administration and teachers to be able to look after their children. They (parents) want to believe kids are going to treat each other with proper respect and when they find out something may have happened there, it's very unsettling for a parent to be confronted with the reality their child may be in an environment that could harm them." |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Mar 12 2010, 08:51 AM Post #10 |
|
I think this may turn out to be a major scandal, nationwide... |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 10:03 AM Post #11 |
|
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2010/03/danziger_bridge_shooting_plea_1.html Danziger Bridge shooting plea, second in case, provides new cover-up details By The Times-Picayune March 11, 2010, 8:07PM jim_letten_crop.JPGTed Jackson/The Times-PicayuneU.S. Attorney Jim Letten returns to the federal courthouse after talking to reporters about Jeffrey Lehrmann's guilty plea. Letten said that law enforcement must not let the stress of crises erode their integrity. This story was written by Brendan McCarthy and Laura Maggi An ex-New Orleans police officer pleaded guilty Thursday to covering up the deadly Danziger Bridge police shooting in the days after Hurricane Katrina, admitting that he and fellow cops invented witnesses, planted a gun, twisted and changed victims' statements and falsified reports. Jeffrey Lehrmann, 38, now a federal immigration agent in Arizona, pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to one count of misprision of a felony -- or concealing knowledge of a federal crime. He is the second former officer to plead guilty and agree to cooperate with federal prosecutors in their sprawling probe into the Danziger Bridge shooting, an incident in which officers fatally shot two people and wounded four others, all unarmed. Related documents from U.S. Attorney Press release Factual basis Lehrmann, currently an agent with U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcment, confessed in detail to participating and witnessing a shocking cover-up, one that he asserts included all of the officers who participated in the shooting, as well as NOPD investigators who conducted the department's internal probe. One of the lead defense attorneys for police officers involved in the shooting remained undaunted Thursday by the onslaught of new allegations in the document filed with Lehrmann's guilty plea. "There's things in that factual basis that just aren't true," said Frank DeSalvo, who represents Sgt. Kenneth Bowen, one of the involved officers. "We are going to show that. It makes us more resolved." New allegations The details offered by Lehrmann about the alleged cover-up match those admitted to by former Lt. Michael Lohman, who pleaded guilty two weeks ago to conspiracy to obstruct justice. But several of the allegations are new. At one point, Lehrmann says, several officers held a secret meeting in a gutted-out police station in order to make sure their false stories matched up before they gave taped interviews. They also plotted to use Hurricane Katrina as an excuse for failures in the investigation, hoping that the storm would make the entire situation "go away," according to Lehrmann's plea. Lehrmann also acknowledged that an NOPD sergeant purposefully kicked shell casings from police guns off the bridge. arthur_kaufman.JPGSgt. Arthur KaufmanWhile Lohman, the other convicted officer, admitted to knowing that the lead investigator in the case planted a gun that police said was linked to one of the civilian victims, Lehrmann offered specific details about the origin of this weapon. Lehrmann said it was retrieved from the home of Sgt. Arthur Kaufman, the leader of the police probe of the shooting. Sometime after a late September court hearing, Lehrmann described traveling to Kaufman's house along with two sergeants involved in the shooting, Bowen and Sgt. Robert Gisevius. All of the officers are identified only by their role in the case - such as "Investigator" or "Sergeant A" - but their identities are clear when referenced against police documents describing either their role in the NOPD probe or the shooting itself. At his house, Kaufman went into his garage and pulled a bag out of a storage container, Lehrmann said. When Lehrmann asked what was in the bag, Kaufman replied, "a ham sandwich." But when Lehrmann looked into the bag he saw a revolver, which Kaufman assured him was "clean," meaning it could not be traced. The gun was entered into police evidence with a citation that Kaufman picked it up from the Danziger Bridge scene on Sept. 5, the day after the shooting. Kaufman has not been charged in the case, but his attorney, Stephen London, has acknowledged he received a target letter in connection with this investigation. He scoffed Thursday at Lehrmann's confession of a drop gun. "How ridiculous does that sound?" London asked. "If I'm going to do something like that, why would I bring three additional people I don't know very well to my house and say I have a ham sandwich? There was no need. You don't need to cover-up something that didn't occur." London emphasized that one of the civilians on the bridge, Lance Madison, testified in a court proceeding several weeks after the shooting that civilian teenagers had been engaged in shooting before police arrived - which attorneys for the police officers say provided a reason why police fired their weapons. Kaufman, London noted, didn't have any role in the shooting itself. "Why would he manufacture statements? Certainly not to protect himself. He had nothing to cover up," London said, adding that the horrible conditions officers were operating under need to be understood. "This was the worst natural disaster in the history of the United States. We were at near anarchy. There were was virtually no civil government." Apology to victims Lehrmann's attorney, Davidson Ehle III, released a statement on his behalf Thursday afternoon in which he apologizes to the Danziger Bridge victims. jeffrey-lehrmann.jpgCourtesy Newshour / PBSJeffrey Lehrmann "He really does feel for these victims. He was motivated in large part, large measure to make sure they received the justice they deserve. It took enormous courage for him to do what he did." Ehle noted that Lehrmann will "continue to assist the government and the victims in the task ahead." Lehrmann faces a maximum sentence of three years in prison and a $250,000 fine. He is free on $25,000 bond and is scheduled to be sentenced June 10. He joined the NOPD in March 2005 and left roughly 18 months later to become an immigration agent. An ICE spokesman said Thursday that Lehrmann has been placed on administrative leave pending an internal investigation. 'Despicable conduct' In federal court Thursday morning, Lehrmann stood with his head tilted and arms crossed at times, shifting his weight from foot to foot. Courtroom whispers ground to a halt as federal prosecutor Bobbi Bernstein recited the the facts of the case. Relatives of 40-year-old Ronald Madison, who was killed in the shootings, watched from a front row bench. Nearby, U.S Attorney Jim Letten sat amid a crowd of FBI agents. Lehrmann's father looked on. Once Bernstein finished, U.S. District Court Judge Lance Africk chastised Lehrmann, calling his actions a disgrace. "In all my years," Africk said, "I have neither imagined nor heard of more despicable conduct by law enforcement officers than that which was described today." Africk noted that Lehrmann "compounded the damage" caused by Katrina "in an immeasurable way." romell_madison_jim_letten.JPGTed Jackson/The Times-PicayuneRomell Madison looks on as U.S. Attorney Jim Letten talks to reporters about Jeffrey Lohrmann's guilty plea.After the hearing, Romell Madison, the brother of Ronald Madison, praised the judge's remarks. "This has been a devastating time for our family and the citizens of this city," he said. The shootings were initially heralded by police as a breakthrough in the battle to regain control of the city after the storm, a sign that police prevailed over a mass of unruly people. But the recent guilty pleas by Lehrmann and Lohman have turned that narrative on its head. And the allegations will continue. The Department of Justice has not charged or indicted the lead investigator or the shooters, though the facts revealed in court documents thus far make it clear they believe others violated the law. The Danziger guilty pleas, and their corresponding implications, have shaken the bedrock of the local criminal justice system. Yet the ongoing investigation is just one of many into the NOPD that carry potentially explosive repurcussions. The FBI confirmed last week that it has at least seven open federal civil rights probes into the department. The NOPD has said it is cooperating with federal agencies. 'All I can say is, "Wow" ' Following Lehrmann's court appearance, NOPD Superintendent Warren Riley sat in a nearby coffee shop with King Logan, a local marketing and public relations specialist. When informed of the details in Lehrmann's guilty plea, Riley responded with disbelief. "Unbelievable," said Riley "All I can say is, 'Wow.'" Riley, who expressed shock and dismay after the first Danziger plea, declined to comment further. Letten, flanked by federal prosecutors after the plea hearing, called Lehrmann's actions egregious. "It's obvious on its face, that these crimes are pretty egregious," Letten said. He also referenced the impact of Hurricane Katrina and how officers planned to use the conditions after the storm to their advantage. "It is during times of crisis, that we must, all of us, that we must be most cognizant of our obligations to our integrity, to the citizens we serve, to the duties we have, and not let that stress erode or diminish that at all," Letten said. The Danziger case was first blown open by Lohman's plea late last month. It was Lehrmann, however, who first began cooperating last summer with federal agents, Letten noted Thursday. Along with other 7th District officers displaced from their station by flood waters, Lehrmann was at the Crystal Palace banquet hall on Chef Menteur Highway when he heard a radio call about officers needing assistance. A group of officers piled into a large Budget rental truck - which they had commandeered because so many of their cars were flooded - to rush to the scene. Lehrmann followed and arrived at the bridge during the shooting. He "noticed that there were no guns on or near the civilians," his plea deal said. He helped render medical aid to some of the wounded civilians and escorted ambulances carrying the four surviving victims to a hospital, according to the federal account. Later that day, he spoke to his supervisor, Kaufman, who said that an officer "shot an innocent man." That officer, "Officer A," is later identified in the federal filing as the officer who shot Ronald Madison. He is Robert Faulcon, a military veteran who quit the force shortly after the storm. Coaching the officer Both Lohman and Lehrmann admit coaching the officer who shot and killed Madison. The eventual police narrative alleged that Madison turned around, looked at police following him and reached into his waistband before he was shot. An attorney for Faulcon, Franz Zibilich, said his client never talked to either of the other men. "No such conversation occurred," he said. Zibilich also said that the conclusion Faulcon is "Officer A" is just an interpretation. But in the supplemental police report written by Kaufman, Faulcon is cited as saying he, along with Gisevius, chased a "male subject" over the bridge. Just beyond the foot of the Gentilly side of the bridge, Faulcon stated "the male subject noticed the police presence and quickly turned towards the officer reaching for an object from his right waistband," according to the report. Faulcon continued that he felt his safety was threatened, so he "opened fire to neutralize the threat," the report stated. Falsified interviews Lehrmann also claims he and Kaufman falsified interviews with two members of the Bartholomew family, the group of civilians shot on the eastern side of Danziger Bridge. The Bartholemews say they were walking on the bridge - heading to get food at the Winn-Dixie supermarket in Gentilly - when police essentially ambushed them, firing their weapons. Susan Bartholomew, then 38, had part of her arm blown off, while her husband, Leonard Bartholomew III was shot in the head. Their 17-year-old daughter, Lesha, was shot, as was a nephew, Jose Holmes. A school friend of Holmes, James Brissette, was killed. While some documents have described Brissette as being 19, an attorney for the family in court said he was 17 when he died. In the police report written by Kaufman and Sgt. Gerard Dugue, Susan and Leonard Bartholomew III are described as saying their nephew had shot at officers. But Lehrmann admitted those interviews were "falsified," saying that the couple actually said no person in their group fired a weapon or even possessed a gun. Dugue, like Kaufman, has not been charged. Phantom witnesses Lehrmann also acknowledged that officers made up the two civilian eyewitnesses named in the 54-page supplemental report, who police cited as backing up the officers' version of events. Those alleged witnesses - supposedly named Lakeisha Smith and James Youngman - do not exist, the factual basis stated. At one point when he was working on a report, Kaufman yelled out to other officers, "Hey, somebody give me a name!," court documents said. Lehrmann admits to providing Kaufman with the name "Lakeisha." That suggestion appeared in the official police report as: "Lakeisha Smith," a black female, born June 29, 1975, who had resided at 6600 Chef Menteur Highway. At the end of the report, in the section that argues why the shootings by police should be considered justifiable, both Smith and Youngman are described as "independent witnesses" who confirm the police version of events. Questions about those witnesses have lingered for three years. The Times-Picayune reported in early 2007 that these witnesses did not appear to exist. Their names did not appear in electronic databases that collect credit information, voter registration and utility sign-ups. In addition, Kaufman's report said that Youngman lived with a cousin at 14000 Michoud Blvd. The address was an empty lot even before Katrina. The NOPD declined to comment for the 2007 article. Since then, Kaufman worked as a supervisor in the Homicide Division. As one of four sergeant supervisors in the unit, he conducted investigations into numerous other police shootings and oversaw and signed off on roughly a quarter of all homicide investigations in New Orleans. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 05:11 PM Post #12 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/03/12/384781/nc-state-auditor-pays-late-tax.html Published Fri, Mar 12, 2010 10:10 AM Modified Fri, Mar 12, 2010 10:15 AM NC state auditor pays late tax bill, interest RALEIGH, N.C. North Carolina State Auditor Beth Wood has paid in full the property taxes that were past due on her Raleigh home. Wake County property tax records show Wood paid $1,238 late last month. The bill for 2009 taxes was due in September and started collecting interest in January. Wood said last month she was trying to juggle her debts like other average people. She says she had to borrow $90,000 to help her 2008 campaign. The Democrat is a certified public accountant who took office last year. She has said her personal finances are irrelevant to her work in state government |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 05:12 PM Post #13 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/03/12/385158/durham-man-charged-in-fatal-shooting.html Published Fri, Mar 12, 2010 02:50 PM Modified Fri, Mar 12, 2010 02:51 PM Durham man charged in fatal shooting DURHAM A 32-year-old man was shot to death in a parking lot in East Durham on Thursday evening, and police have charged another man with his murder. Manuel Erazo Oseguera was shot once in the chest and pronounced dead at the scene, according to Durham police. Police charged Romualdo Erazo Ruiz, 40, of Farm House Lane with murder. Police say they think Oseguera and Ruiz knew each other, but they have not released a motive for the shooting or other details. Police ask anyone with information about the incident to call Corporal S. Pennica at 560-4440, ext. 29320 or Crimestoppers at 683-1200. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Mar 12 2010, 05:14 PM Post #14 |
|
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2010/03/anatomy-of-injustice-heres-what-can.html Friday, March 12, 2010 Anatomy of an injustice: here's what can happen when prosecutors rely on the word of a rape accuser This is a cautionary tale for anyone who wholeheatedly supports allowing rape convictions based solely or essentially on the word of the accuser without corroboration. Dwayne Dail is a poster child for the wrongly accused. If you aren't familiar with his story, click on his name -- it is must reading. Mr. Dail went to prison as a 19-year-old for an alleged rape of a twelve-year-old girl he did not commit. He ended up serving 18 years in prison and being victimized by the very same crime he did not commit -- repeatedly. His life was destroyed. Mr. Dail's conviction was based almost entirely on the say so of a teenage girl. If you want to know how easy it is to do an injustice with such scant evidence, read what the district attorney who prosecuted Mr. Dail said about the case. But a warning: don't read this on an empty stomach. Don Strickland, the attorney who prosecuted the case, said this: "I didn't have the strongest case in the world, but nor did I have the weakest." (See, it's perfectly OK to try someone for a crime that will send him away for decades without having the strongest case.) He explained that his prosecution of Dail hinged on two things -- the victim's identification and the "microscopically consistent" hair found on the rug in her room (which just meant that the hair had the same characteristics as Mr. Dail's hair). Strickland said the following: "The strongest thing I remember about it was the way she identified him. She was walking in an apartment area and she just froze and said 'Mom, that's him.' She was an excellent witness. She was almost a prosecutor's dream. She positively (identified) him." A "prosecutor's dream" -- because she seemed so believable. Never mind if she really was telling the truth. As for the hair: "The science of that hair match was not the greatest in the world, but in those days we didn't have DNA. It was the best we had. I thought it was better than nothing, but it turned out it wasn't." And a pubic hair found at the scene did not match Mr. Dail. Oh, they had other "evidence," too -- useless evidence -- a vaginal swab, but they weren't able to make an accurate determination whether the semen had come from Mr. Dail or not. Great. Wait, there's more. What about the police investigation? "It wasn't the greatest police work in the case. That detective was no Sherlock Holmes." So, you had junk science with the "consistent" hair that the prosecutor now admits was the same as nothing, you had evidence that was inconsistent with Mr. Dail's involvement, you had evidence that everyone accepted showed nothing (the vaginal swab), you had a mediocre police investigation -- and you had a twelve-year-old girl who was very believable. Ladies and gentlemen, what this case came down to is this: a twelve year old girl sent a 19-year-old man away for 18 years -- because a district attorney and the jury believed her over him. She was a better actress than Mr. Dail. As the prosecutor said: "The girl said that he was the guy who did it. I couldn't dismiss that," Strickland said. Read that last sentence again and again, and let it sink in. A man's liberty, his life, was completely in the hands of a twelve-year-old girl. His life was destroyed because she turned out to be a better little actor. And that, ladies and gentlemen, tells us that there is something very, very wrong with the system. |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Mar 12 2010, 07:10 PM Post #15 |
|
Is that illegal? Will the feds really investigate things like that? Is this a new federal DOJ policy?
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







7:13 PM Jul 10