|UPDATED CHRONOLOGY OF DUKE LACROSSE CASE-- JULY 2006; Nifong Plows Ahead Despite Doubts|
|Topic Started: Jun 28 2010, 09:42 PM (669 Views)|
|sceptical||Jun 28 2010, 09:42 PM Post #1|
UPDATED CHRONOLOGY OF DUKE LACROSSE CASE: JULY, 2006
(Thanks to Quasi, Q.A, JSwift and Baldo for their review of the manuscript.)
SATURDAY JULY 1: Blogger John In Carolina writes about the efforts of attorney Alex Charns, representing an unindicted lacrosse player, to investigate the CrimeStoppers “wanted posters,” which Charns calls “libelous” in his e-mails to Durham City Manager Patrick Baker and Police Chief Steve Chalmers.
SUNDAY JULY 2: The Johnsville News blog summarizes in detail defendant Reade Seligmann’s alibi evidence including photos, phone records, key card data, and affidavits from witnesses including neighbor Jason Bissey, lacrosse player Rob Wellington and taxi driver Moez Elmostafa.
MONDAY JULY 3: With more than a dozen petition drives, North Carolina is setting "a modern-day record" for efforts aimed at placing unaffiliated candidates on the November ballot, Gary Bartlett, the state's top elections official, says. The highest-profile petition drive is that of Durham County Commissioner Lewis Cheek, whose volunteers handed in more than 9,800 voter signatures to beat a noon deadline June 30. It is the first step in a potential challenge to District Attorney Mike Nifong, a fellow Democrat who has been criticized for his handling of accusations against Duke lacrosse players.
Writing for the Guardian (U.K.), Robert Zelnick discusses racial aspects of the case. “But District Attorney Mike Nifong is a prisoner of today's racial paradigm, in which rich, uncaring whites oppress poor, exploited blacks. And the editorial silence of the liberal media in the face of an outrage compounded daily suggests that they have bought into it to.”
TUESDAY JULY 4: Independence Day holiday
WEDNESDAY JULY 5: Prof. KC Johnson of Brooklyn College writes in the Cliopatria history blog about Duke faculty Orin Starn and Peter Wood, who have been openly hostile to the lacrosse players. “The behavior of Wood, Starn, and their colleagues from the Group of 88 (each of whose signature, to date, remains on the so-called “listening” statement) is shameless. Hopefully, at some point, they will be held accountable for their willingness to take actions that aided and abetted Nifong’s campaign against their own students.”
THURSDAY JULY 6:
FRIDAY JULY 7: In a blogpost Prof. Bill Anderson of Frostburg State College compares the Duke case to that of Tawana Brawley, who made false rape allegations in l987 in New York.
SATURDAY JULY 8:
SUNDAY JULY 9:
MONDAY JULY 10: Collin Finnerty appears for trial on assault charges in a Washington, D.C. courtroom. Finnerty, along with two of his high-school friends, is accused of threatening a man with fake punches in November, 2005, after allegedly calling him gay and yelling derogatory remarks. Defense attorneys, however, say Finnerty is the one who was attacked. Complainant Jeffrey Bloxsom testifies that Finnerty was an instigator who hurled a variety of vulgar, homophobic comments at him as they walked in the Georgetown neighborhood. "He was the one who wanted to fight the most," Bloxsom says of Finnerty. "He would say to me, 'Say you're a (blank). Say you're a (blank). ... I acquiesced." Bloxsom says he was not struck by Finnerty but by one of his associates. The second complainant, Scott Herndon, says Finnerty punched him after he restrained Finnerty from punching Bloxsom. Defense lawyers present a wholly different picture of the incident, saying that Herndon threw the first punch, to the back of Finnerty's head. A former Duke lacrosse captain, William Gerrish, who was present that night, testifies the fight stemmed from an altercation inside the bar, with both sides talking back and forth. He acknowledges telling the investigator that Finnerty was "fired up, but I don’t think he was the lead dog trying to instigate the situation." Gerrish testifies he saw someone hit Finnerty when Gerrish was a block away from them.
Attorneys for unindicted Duke lacrosse players appear in court to fight prosecution subpoenas that seek access to school records. Attorneys want to prevent DA Mike Nifong from getting Duke records of the home addresses of team members and records of their use of student identity cards. The lawyers argue the information is protected by federal privacy laws. Bob Ekstrand, who represents 33 of the team's 46 players, says Nifong has provided no reason why he needs the information. According to a motion filed by lawyer Bill Thomas on behalf of a graduated Duke player, "The subpoenas were issued erroneously as they are not supported by an affidavit providing legal justification" for needing the information. At the time, the attorneys did not know that Duke Police had already given this information to Durham Police Sgt. Mark Gottlieb on March 31.
TUESDAY JULY 11: Collin Finnerty is convicted of misdemeanor assault and sentenced to six months of probation in connection with an altercation with two bar patrons on Nov. 5, 2005. Superior Court Judge John Bayly also orders Finnerty to undergo drug and alcohol counseling if required by probation officers. He must also stay out of Georgetown during his probation and out of any establishment where alcohol is served unless accompanied by his parents. Prosecutor George Verghese states in closing arguments that Finnerty threw fake punches that landed within inches of Bloxsom's face and hurled various vulgar homophobic epithets. Judge Bayly says he believes Finnerty was guilty of "menacing" Bloxsom as part of an assault, even though it was one of Finnerty’s friends who admitted punching Bloxsom, giving him a bloody lip. Finnerty's two friends admitted criminal responsibility in the case but avoided prosecution under a special program for first-time offenders. Outside court, Finnerty's attorney, Steven McCool, says he will appeal the conviction. "Judge Bayly found Collin Finnerty guilty of simple assault because he threw fake punches ... and because he scared one of the complaining witnesses in the case. That's it," McCool states.
County Commissioner Lewis Cheek announces at a news conference he still has not decided whether to run for Durham district attorney, despite an overwhelmingly successful petition drive that officially puts him on the ballot against Mike Nifong. Durham elections officials have spent more than a week counting and validating thousands of signatures collected by organizers of an effort to add Cheek's name to the November ballot. County Elections Director Mike Ashe say he and his staff validated more than enough signatures to add Cheek's name as an unaffiliated candidate. Whether Cheek ultimately decides to run or not, voters will be able to cast ballots for the veteran Democratic politician. "There's nothing anybody can do," Ashe says. "He's on the ballot."
WEDNESDAY JULY 12: An article “Call adds mystery to lacrosse case” by Joseph Neff in the Raleigh News & Observer reveals the telephone records of accuser Crystal Mangum the night of the lacrosse party. The phone record narrows the window for any alleged assault to between 12:04 A.M. when Mangum and a second woman stopped dancing and 12:26 a.m. when Mangum called her escort service:
“According to a copy of the accuser's phone bill reviewed by The N&O, she received short calls at 11:11 p.m. and 11:22 p.m., and then called her father at 11:25, a call that lasted 7 minutes. She received two more calls, at 11:33 and 11:36. This last call lasted three minutes, indicating she did not arrive at the party until 11:39 p.m. at the earliest.
Brian Taylor, a friend who drove her to the party, told The N&O in May she was late and he had difficulty finding the house. "On our way there, she got two calls on her cell phone saying if you don't come soon, it's going to get canceled," Taylor said in an interview in May.
Court filings show that the dancers and the lacrosse players agree on one thing: The women danced in the living room of the house for several minutes before a crude comment from a lacrosse player made Roberts uncomfortable and the women stopped dancing. Time-stamped photos of the party show the women dancing at midnight and then leaving the room at 12:04 a.m.
In prior interviews, defense lawyers have said the women, after they left the room, locked themselves in the bathroom while one lacrosse captain tried to persuade them to continue the show. The women then left the house, the lawyers said. At 12:26 a.m. came the call to Centerfold [Mangum’s escort service]. The next time-stamped photo shows the accuser on the back porch, fumbling through a small bag at 12:30. A photo at 12:37 shows her lying on the back porch as if passed out. A final photograph, at 12:41, shows a player helping the accuser into Kim Roberts' car. As she was driving away with the accuser, Roberts called 911 at 12:53 to complain that the men were shouting racial slurs at her.”
Blogger John In Carolina criticizes the News & Observer’s original reporting in March of the rape accusations, noting that the newspaper did not include the facts that the team captains cooperated with police.
JULY 13: The Washington Post publishes an article by Marc Fisher titled “Wolves in Blazer’s and Khakis” attacking Collin Finnerty based on the Georgetown incident. Fisher writes in part, “When in the company of elders and teachers, these young men do behave admirably. When the stage lights go off and the guys head out to drink and drink and drink, anything goes. Hey, they're just kids! Or as the priest who testified for Finnerty puts it, ‘One incident doesn't make a gentleman's character.’"
Prof. KC Johnson reveals on the Cliopatria blog the results of a survey of prosecutors in North Carolina:
“Since Nifong himself ordered the Durham Police to confine the photo ID session to pictures of the lacrosse team, I assumed this degree of D.A. involvement was standard practice for North Carolina. So I e-mailed every district attorney in the state, asking if they used AIC guidelines in photo ID lineups that they oversaw. I noted that my interest had been sparked by the revelations in the lacrosse case. In one-line replies, two refused to answer my questions; several others didn’t respond. But from the rest (with one exception, to be noted below), I received what was for me a surprising consensus, for which this note was typical: “In North Carolina, DAs have little power to dictate to local law enforcement what investigative techniques should be used.” Most (though not all) said that they encouraged police departments in their jurisdiction to use AIC guidelines.”
FRIDAY JULY 14: Sgt. Mark Gottlieb gives DA Nifong a set of typewritten case notes. These notes are purported to be a contemporaneous police record of the alleged rape case beginning when Gottlieb assumed control of the investigation. However, Gottlieb later admits on April 19, 2007, while being deposed by State Bar lawyers, that the notes were actually written in early July and were largely from memory.
Durham Police Chief Steve Chalmers announces that he will retire in December 2007. Chalmers has disappeared from public activities during the lacrosse episode, asserting he is caring for his ill mother.
SATURDAY JULY 15 :
SUNDAY JULY 16: New York Times publishes an admiring portrait of Reade Seligmann by Peter Applebome titled “As Accusation at Duke Festers, Disbelief Gnaws at Suspect’s Supporters.” The article begins: “ Patricia Crapo has been teaching religion and writing college recommendations for a quarter century, but only once did she allow herself to put so much of her heart on the page. “If I had a son, I would hope he could be like Reade,” Mrs. Crapo wrote three years ago on behalf of a student [Reade] applying to Duke. “I have been teaching at the high school level for 24 years, and I have never said or written that about another student.”
The News & Observer’s Jane Stancil in an article “Lacrosse Defense Sways Media” writes about the changes in public opinion since the onset of the case:
“The accused players' attorneys have let loose a steady stream of leaks and court filings that cast doubt on almost everything about the case. Reporters have pounced on every new detail. In some cases, powerful Duke supporters have used their connections to steer journalists toward stories sympathetic to the players. At the same time, the once-quiet players' families are boldly speaking out.”
MONDAY JULY 17: Attorneys for unindicted Duke lacrosse players appear in court to fight prosecution subpoenas issued May 31 that seek access to school records. Attorneys for the players want to prevent DA Nifong from gaining access to Duke records of their home addresses and oftheir use of student identity cards. The lawyers argue the information is protected by federal privacy laws. According to Nifong, every member of the lacrosse team is a potential witness in the case against three players charged with rape. "We want to be able to confirm what they tell us about where they went afterward," Nifong says of the uncharged players. "We're not trying to investigate them. We are not trying to say there are crimes that we want to prove they are guilty of. We want to be put in a position to call them to tell the jury in Durham what they observed go on that night when this took place." Nifong does not reveal at the hearing that he already improperly received the subpoenaed information from Duke Police, who had turned it over to Durham Police Sgt. Gottlieb on March 31.
Superior Court Judge Kenneth C. Titus declines to issue a deadline for the completion of the discovery process during a brief pretrial hearing in the criminal case against the three lacrosse players Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans, who do not attend their hearing.
At the hearing, Judge Titus admonishes the prosecutor and defense lawyers in the case to watch what they say to the news media. By ordering them to follow the rule that limits what lawyers can say in an active case, Titus puts everyone on notice that the constant news coverage could imperil a fair trial. "This court takes judicial notice of the extensive pretrial publicity that's been available in all of these cases, including media coverage with statements and information which would normally be prohibited," Titus says. "It is this court's responsibility to ensure that the defendants and the state proceed with the constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair trial by a jury free of partiality, bias or prejudice." The order does not prevent attorneys in the case from talking publicly, but does prohibit statements that have a "substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing" the case. "The rules of professional responsibility require us to be very careful of what we say," says Wade Smith, one of Finnerty's attorneys. "We'll do that. We've been doing that. And we'll continue to do that." Joseph Cheshire, one of Evans' attorneys, says of Titus' order "It would not have precluded us from doing a single thing that we have done so far.”
Duke University announces that it experienced a record fundraising run, reeling in more than $341 million in donations in the fiscal year that ended June 30. "We had a very good year, thankfully,"says Robert Shepard, vice president for alumni affairs and development. The previous one-year record occurred in 1999-2000, when Duke received more than $302 million in charitable gifts. Part of the success of the past year was Duke's drive to raise $300 million by the end of 2008 to support financial aid for needy students, according to Shepard. The Duke Endowment, a Charlotte-based charitable organization created by university founder James B. Duke, was the biggest donor in 2005-06, giving more than $53 million compared with $38 million the previous year.
TUESDAY JULY 18: Durham Police Inv. Ben Himan picks up Crystal Mangum’s cell phone, which had been under analysis. “7/18/06 1212hrs - Picked up phone from Ryan Johnson’s computer forensics lab and put it in property,” according to Himan’s notes. Later in the day, “7/18/06 1430hrs - Lawyers from case arrived to look at property and court files. File from CSI Ashby was given to all lawyers.”
Several lawyers express outrage at what they described as a preposterous, unprofessional and insulting comment DA Nifong made in a Monday July 17 court session on the Duke lacrosse case. During a preliminary hearing, Nifong suggested that lawyers for some unindicted lacrosse players might wish they could share in the "spectacle" of the nationally publicized case. According to Nifong: "It looked sometimes over the course of the last few months that some of these attorneys were almost disappointed that their clients didn't get indicted so they could be a part of this spectacle here in Durham." One of those attorneys, Bill Thomas, says Nifong owes an apology to the lawyers, the court and the public.
WEDNESDAY JULY 19: In an open letter published in The [Duke] Chronicle a group called Friends of Duke University says school leaders "cowered in the face of media pressure" and that the university has "remained hesitant in its support" of the three athletes and the lacrosse team, and in the process, has "sacrificed its own students and values." The group of alumni, parents and supporters of Duke, who say they are concerned about the university's response to the lacrosse case, asks President Richard Brodhead and the Board of Trustees to consider speaking up for Duke students, being fair to the men's lacrosse team and encouraging others to do so as well. In the letter, Friends of Duke says the administration's "passive response" to District Attorney Mike Nifong's behavior concerning the case "will lead future students to think twice before attending Duke." The group states it wants to urge the university to use all its influence to ensure the three men accused "receive justice through a fair process."
An article in The Chronicle about state Alcohol Law Enforcement (ALE) tactics against students discusses relations between students and their neighbors in Trinity Park. Alice Bumgarner, president of the Trinity Park Neighborhood Association, stresses that the relationships between full-time residents and students vary from year to year, and this year residents are hoping for a more positive climate. "We're looking forward to having different kinds of relationships than standing around on your front lawn at 2 a.m. yelling back and forth," Bumgarner says. In 2005, students were surprised and angered by encounters with officers--some of whom were undercover--at parties in off-campus houses, bars and clubs. ALE agents handed out citations for underage drinking, possession of fake identification and aiding and abetting underage possession.
Duke lacrosse players Bo Carrington, Tony McDevitt and John Walsh speak out about how the rape charges against three of their teammates have affected their lives in a Chronicle article “Living a Nightmare:”
“It's awful because you want people to know the truth, you want people to know what really happened, but they don't want to hear that," Carrington explained more than three months after that day on the quad
During those weeks in early April, Carrington and his teammates encountered pictures of themselves plastered around campus like WANTED posters. Posters that, in their minds, conveyed a predetermined judgment: guilty.
"If nobody's guilty then you can't tell them who's guilty," the junior continued.
THURSDAY JULY 20: Defense attorney Kirk Osborn files a motion asking the judge to set court dates for various motion hearings. In the motion, he argues his client, Reade Seligmann, deserves a speedy trial. Osborn says that a year of his college life has been taken from him and another year could be if things don't get moving more quickly.
An employee at Blinco’s, a Raleigh sports bar, is assaulted by off-duty Durham police officers. Rene Dennis Thomas, 29, a line cook at the restaurant, tells Raleigh Police that he was smoking a cigarette behind the building about 11:30 p.m. when he saw a black Nissan truck speed out of the parking lot, tires squealing. He exchanged words with the occupants. Soon Thomas was surrounded by men, one of whom charged at him, according to Thomas. He states he dropped to the ground in a defensive posture. Someone hit him and a shoe grazed his face, he says. Police are called at 11:58 p.m. It is later revealed that Durham Police Sgt. Mark Gottlieb and Inv. Richard Clayton were among the off-duty officers.
FRIDAY JULY 21: Duke University introduces John Danowski as the new lacrosse coach at a news conference. "John Danowski is a great coach, on and off the field," says Athletic Director Joe Alleva. "He's well known in the lacrosse community not only for his championships but also for his character and integrity, and for bringing out the best in his players. He knows Duke's lacrosse program will be facing special scrutiny and is committed to working with the players and others to ensure the team is a source of pride for the entire Duke community." Danowski just completed his 21st season at New York's Hofstra University. His son, Matt, is a rising senior on the Duke lacrosse team.
Judge Kenneth Titus rules that DA Nifong can have the addresses of lacrosse players not charged in the case. However, Titus does not allow Nifong to have information that is contained in the players' Duke key cards. The ruling is in response to defense motions to quash subpoenas issued to team players. Nifong states he needs the information because all of the players could be possible witnesses. Defense attorneys say it is an invasion of the players' privacy and argue it could compromise their safety. Neither Nifong nor Duke reveal that Nifong already had the key card information, which Duke Police on March 31 improperly gave to Sgt. Mark Gottlieb of the Durham Police in violation of FERPA rules.
SATURDAY JULY 22: Duke University officials are thinking about letting builders buy some of the party houses the school purchased early in 2006 in neighborhoods near campus. Bids for the first seven properties have not been what the school had hoped for, says Jeff Potter, director of real estate operations. Most of the houses need major repairs, and Duke real estate officials think it might make better business sense to sell them to builders who would do the renovation work and then sell them with occupancy restrictions. The school shelled out $3.7 million for 12 rental houses and three lots in the Trinity Park, Trinity Heights and Burch Avenue neighborhoods. Many of the properties were the scenes of raucous student parties over the years.
SUNDAY JULY 23: It is revealed that Durham police officers Mark Gottlieb and Richard Clayton are on paid administrative leave in the aftermath of the beating of a cook outside Blinco’s, a sports bar in Raleigh, on July 20. Rene Thomas claims he was assaulted after a verbal altercation in the parking lot.
Durham Herald-Sun editor Bob Ashley publishes a column “Has the lacrosse case induced insanity?”
MONDAY JULY 24: Raleigh police are at Durham's police headquarters interviewing an undisclosed number of Durham officers about the alleged July 20 assault outside Blinco's restaurant. Deputy Police Chief Ron Hodge confirms that Sgt. Mark Gottlieb, the supervisor in the Duke rape investigation, was questioned. Also among those interviewed are Inv. Richard Clayton, another detective involved in the Duke case. According to the News & Obsever, Raleigh resident Rene Thomas, 29, a cook at Blinco's, said he was taking a cigarette break about 11:30 p.m. when he saw a black Nissan Titan truck dramatically peel out of the parking lot, so he yelled "woo-hoo!" in approval. According to Thomas, a white passenger yelled, "F you, n—“ Thomas, who is black, replied, "F you, cracker!" at which point the vehicle stopped. Thomas then charged at the truck, demanding an explanation for the aggression. At that point, according to Thomas, the truck's passenger said, "You don't know what you're getting into, boy." Thomas said three or four cars then pulled up beside him, and five or six men got out and surrounded him. Thomas said, "None of y'all are gonna touch me," at which point, according to Thomas, the passenger who had yelled at him pushed his finger into Thomas' shoulder.
Linwood Wilson, an investigator in the District Attorney’s office, interviews second dancer Kim (Roberts) Pittman in DA Nifong’s office. Her attorney discusses her parole violations with Nifong. During this meeting, Pittman “remembered” the events of the evening differently. She now “remembered” that the separation from Crystal Mangum she had described as no more than five minutes may have been as much as 15 minutes. Pittman also “remembered” that she heard the accuser in the bathroom with several players.
A hearing on a probation violation for Pittman is postponed until Sept. 25. Pittman and her lawyer Mark Simeon leave the courthouse without comment. Pittman, 31, was arrested on March 22 -- eight days after the March 13 party -- on a probation violation from a 2001 conviction for embezzling $25,000 from a photofinishing company in Durham, where she worked as a payroll specialist. According to court documents, Pittman failed to pay restitution to her former employer, missed appointments with her probation officer and left North Carolina without permission.
TUESDAY JULY 25: Duke President Brodhead replies to a letter from the group Friends of Duke University, stating in part:
“I am well aware that, after many weeks of media stories that made it seem almost self-evidently true that a rape had occurred, recent stories have offered extensive evidence exonerating the indicted students and questioning the legitimacy of the case. But the University does not have direct access to the full truth of the case now any more than we did earlier, and we can't speak with certainty of matters that only the criminal justice system can resolve.”
“We are eager for our students to be proved innocent. We share the wish for a speedy resolution of all the matters that are now in doubt. In my June 5 community statement I spoke of the ordeal our team members have lived through – a painful, costly experience for themselves, their families, and the community as a whole. I also reiterated that if the indicted students are the objects of a false accusation, they are the objects of an injustice as grave as the one they have been accused of. But as you recognize, the University can't go the further step and proclaim our certainty of their innocence. That requires resolution through the legal system – which is all the more reason why we require the legal system to proceed in a fair-minded, even-handed, and speedy fashion.”
“You also voice the perception that the University has been complicit in scapegoating members of the lacrosse team. I recognize the gravity of the charge, but I do not agree with it. It was the party that the men’s lacrosse team held on the night of March 13 that precipitated the subsequent avalanche of publicity and notoriety. In our statements, the University has been consistently critical of the team's conduct on that night (while taking scrupulous pains to distinguish between the acknowledged conduct and the felony charges, which have not been established)…”
WEDNESDAY JULY 26:
THURSDAY JULY 27: Durham County Commissioner Lewis Cheek, citing concerns over the financial health of his law firm, announces he will not actively run for district attorney, nor will he accept the job if he gets enough votes to defeat Mike Nifong in the November election. Cheek earned a spot on the ballot after a quick and successful petition drive by four Durham political activists. Cheek, a lifelong Democrat and veteran politician, has been cautious about the idea of leaving his civil law practice. He says at a news conference today that if he wins the election, he would not take the job and the governor would have to appoint someone. "I will not run a campaign, and I will not serve as district attorney," Cheek says. Cheek cannot remove his name from the ballot. He suggests anyone dissatisfied with Nifong could vote for him.
Durham Police Officers Gary Lee and Scott Tanner are charged with simple assault in connection with the Blinco’s incident. Gottlieb, Clayton and other investigated officers are restored to full-duty status.
FRIDAY JULY 28: DA Mike Nifong holds a news conference. "My handling of the media coverage of this case has occasioned substantial criticism, some of which is undoubtedly justified," Nifong states during a half-hour press conference. "I both underestimated the level of media attention this case would draw and misjudged the effect that my words would have. That having been said, this case remains a Durham problem and it demands a Durham solution.” Nifong says the election should be based on his 28-year career.
The first posting on the new Liestoppers blog is a comic “wanted poster” by “Baldo” depicting some of the individuals involved in the Duke lacrosse case. http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2006/07/liestoppers-durhams-most-wanted.html
Liestoppers also issues a statement in response to Nifong’s press conference, stating in part: “On one point we do find ourselves in agreement with Mr. Nifong. Durham problems deserve Durham solutions. The Durham solution we suggest is electing ANYBODY BUT NIFONG District Attorney for Durham County.”
D.A. Nifong threatens to step down from a county board because some of his fellow members signed a petition in support of Lewis Cheek, whose name will appear opposite Nifong's in this fall's election. Nifong wrote recently that he is reconsidering his role on the Animal Control Advisory Committee, an eight-member volunteer board that meets four times a year and advises the county's animal control office. In a July 28 e-mail message to his fellow board members, Nifong writes that he "was truly dismayed at the number of my fellow board members who signed the Lewis Cheek [petition]."
SATURDAY JULY 29:
SUNDAY JULY 30: In a series of blogposts, attorney Michael Gaynor attacks the July 17 ruling by Judge Kenneth Titus limiting out-of-court comments by defense lawyers and prosecutors in the lacrosse case. “The reality appears to be that Judge Titus is a judicial travesty helping an out-of-control prosecutor who created a presumption of guilt for the Duke Three by his own public remarks and doesn't want it rebutted and himself reviled for his egregious misconduct,” according to Gaynor.
MONDAY JULY 31: An article in the N&O by Benjamin Niolet titled “Some see opportunity on sidelines of lacrosse case” features stories about individuals in Durham who have taken advantage of the case to promote themselves or their views. Among those mentioned are lawyers Mark Edwards, Ed West and Mark Simeon and activist Victoria Peterson.
In an editorial the Charlotte Observer calls for the appointment of a special prosecutor in the lacrosse case, suggesting that DA Nifong step aside.
Edited by sceptical, Jun 28 2010, 09:53 PM.
|sceptical||Jun 28 2010, 09:46 PM Post #2|
JULY 1—John In Carolina on the CrimeStoppers “Wanted Poster”
JULY 2-- Reade Seligmann’s Alibi in detail
JULY 3—Robert Zelnick in the Guardian about racial aspects
JULY 5-- Shameless by KC Johnson (on Orin Starn & Peter Wood)
JULY 7-- Tawana Brawley II by Bill Anderson
JULY 10,11-- Finnerty Trial
JULY 12—Joe Neff Article on Mangum Phone Calls
JULY 12—John in Carolina on News & Observer’s reporting of rape charges
JULY 13-- North Carolina Norms on line-up procedures by KC Johnson
JULY 13—“Wolves in Blazers and Khakis” in Washington Post
JULY 14-- Gottlieb Deposition by KC Johnson
JULY 16-- Lacrosse Defense Lawyers & Media:
JULY 19—Friends of Duke University letter to Brodhead, Board of Trustees
JULY 20—Lacrosse players speak out
JULY 25—Brodhead reply to Friends of Duke University http://friendsofdukeuniversity.blogspot.com/2006/02/press-release-no-2.html
JULY 28-- Liestoppers first post (“Durham’s Most Wanted” poster)
JULY 30—Michael Gaynor attacks Judge Titus’ “gag order”
JULY 31—Benjamin Niolet in N& O on Durhamites taking advantage of case
(The Duke lacrosse case article indices in the Raleigh News & Observer and the Duke Chronicle have been taken down following website revisions. Articles can still be found using the search feature of the new websites.)
EVANS et al v. DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA, CITY OF et al
MCFADYEN et al v. DUKE UNIVERSITY et al
CARRINGTON et al v. DUKE UNIVERSITY et al
Duke University & Brodhead Statements
Duke University Archive of Media Coverage
Johnsville Blog Posts
KC Johnson’s Case Narrative
Chronology by Vance Holmes “Poetic Justice”
CBS News Chronology
Friends of Duke University Media Index
|Quasimodo||Jun 28 2010, 09:52 PM Post #3|
It's necessary to get these timelines and sources pinned down before they disappear from the NET and/or memories fade.
This case was very, very complicated, with a thousand twists and turns.
Thanks to sceptical for helping preserve not only the sources but also a roadmap.
|MikeZPU||Jun 28 2010, 11:29 PM Post #4|
skeptical: many thanks for your tremendous effort in documenting this detailed timeline.
|MikeZPU||Jun 28 2010, 11:37 PM Post #5|
Nifong: what an SOB!
The outsiders, e.g., the national media, were more than welcome when they were fully supportive and promoted the metanarrative
BUT once that support started to erode a bit, Nifong's tune changed to: let us here in Durham handle this, behind closed doors.
Edited by MikeZPU, Jun 28 2010, 11:48 PM.
|Baldo||Jun 29 2010, 07:18 AM Post #6|
This chrono is excellent. Sceptical's detailed research on this is quite an accomplishment.
It is also posted on the LieStoppers blog
Edited by Baldo, Jun 29 2010, 07:33 AM.
|Quasimodo||Jun 29 2010, 07:33 AM Post #7|
And what exactly is a "Durham solution"?
Think about the ramifications of a DA not understanding that the entire point of the legal process is to protect an
accused defendant and insure that innocent persons are not convicted.
(This is right up there with the learned President of a University saying his accused students should have the right to prove
|MikeZPU||Jun 29 2010, 11:15 AM Post #8|
If the university did not have access to the full truth, then certainly the media did not have access to the full truth
during those "many weeks of media stories that made it seem almost self-evidently true that a rape had occurred."
So, where was Brodhead's criticism of the media for their presumption of guilt?
And why did Brodhead make a public statement about Kim's 911 call? He didn't have access to the full truth
there, and yet he chose to make a public apology?
And that gets to the core: no one was calling for Brodhead to announce that the LAX players were innocent.
People wanted due process for the LAX players.
Brodhead certainly had an obligation to question Nifong's handling of the case and, specifically,
Nifong's guilt-presuming public statements that were clearly intended to enrage the community.
Brodhead knew those statements were totally improper and highly unethical, but said nothing.
And what about all the protocols that were violated by the DPD and Nifong?
Couldn't he at least question why protocol after protocol kept getting violated for no valid reason?
And what "full truth" did Brodhead need after SBI DNA testing came up empty AND highly
sensitive Y-STR/ Y-plex DNA testing came up empty?
Edited by MikeZPU, Jun 29 2010, 02:11 PM.
|sceptical||Jul 2 2010, 02:50 PM Post #9|
Here are links to the Updated Chronology of Duke Lacrosse Case:
March, 2006: http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/topic/1827748/1/
April, 2006: http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/topic/1976244/1/
May, 2006: http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/topic/2832366/1/
June, 2006: http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/topic/3225687/1/#new
July, 2006: http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/topic/3521836/1/#new
|sceptical||Jul 6 2010, 07:59 PM Post #10|
I believe that one of the main objectives of Liestoppers is to promote the proposition: "It's not all about Nifong."
The rationale is that many in the public attribute the Duke lacrosse case solely to Mike Nifong, the disgraced former Durham DA. Furthermore, there are some at Duke, in the Durham Police Department, and in the Durham City government who want to blame Nifong for the whole affair in order to limit their own liability. For example, in their responses to the civil suits, both Mark Gottlieb and Ben Himan insist
they were acting at Nifong's behest.
The problem with blaming everything on Nifong is that the attempted frame-up began even before Nifong took control of the investigation into Crystal Mangum's charges.
Notwithstanding the culpability of other actors such as Gottlieb, Himan, Levicy, Brodhead et al, as time passes we sometimes forget how outrageous were Nifong's statements and actions.
The July 2006 Chronology includes two egregious statements by Nifong. In the first, at a July 17 2006 courth hearing, Nifong states, with no proof whatsoever, that some unnamed attorneys for the unindicted lacrosse players were disappointed that their clients had not been indicted. He claimed the attorneys wanted to be part of the"spectacle" in Durham. These remarks were insulting and absurd on their face. (Of course, Judge Ken Titus did not admonish Nifong for them during the hearing).
The second statement came at a July 28 press conferences. Nifong stated "... this case remains a Durham problem and it demands a Durham solution." What was Nifong's Durham solution? False testimony, manufactured evidence, witness tampering, shoddy police investigations, biased judges and a district attorney who was more focused on his pension and reelection than on justice.
Two of Nifong's bizzare actions also happened in July 2006. First, there was the charade hearing in which Nifong asked permission from Judge Titus to obtain home addresses and Duke key card data. Neither he nor Duke revealed during this sham that the information had already been turned over to Mark Gottlieb by Duke Police on March 31, in violation of FERPA privacy regulations. It is ironic that Titus ruled they could have the addresses but not the key card data.
The second was Nifong's petty threat to resign from the Animal Control Board when he found out (how?) that some of the other board members had signed a petition for his potential rival, Lewis Cheek.
These are only examples from a single month of the Hoax. Mike Nifong was lucky to only spend one night in jail.
|1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)|
|« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »|