Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Blog and Media Roundup - Sunday, October 24, 2010; News Roundup
Topic Started: Oct 24 2010, 04:55 AM (441 Views)
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story_news_durham/10028968/article-Panel--Raise-juvenile-court-jurisdiction-maximum-age-to-18?instance=main_article

Panel: Raise juvenile court jurisdiction maximum age to 18
The Herald Sun
10.24.10 - 12:21 am
BY MATTHEW E. MILLIKEN

mmilliken@heraldsun.com; 419-6684

DURHAM — A panel of local officials who support juvenile justice changes rolled out a number of reasons Saturday afternoon to bolster their cause.

Speaking before an audience of perhaps two dozen sympathizers at the Durham Main Library auditorium, a District Court judge, a public defender and a state legislator gave several justifications for raising the maximum age of juvenile court jurisdiction from 16 to 18.

A 16-year-old, Judge Marcia Morey noted, can’t be drafted into the military. “Why? Because you’re a juvenile,” she said. “But in North Carolina, if you go out to Duke Park and it’s dark and it’s 7 o’clock and it’s October, you can be arrested. Where is the sense in that?”

Phillip Penn, an attorney with the public defender’s office, noted that 30,000 16- and 17-year-olds are involved in adult criminal court, about 80 percent for minor crimes. “In adult court, you’re not going to be getting educational services, you’re not going to be getting mental health services, you’re not going to be getting substance abuse treatment of any significance if they’re not capable of paying for it and following through,” Penn said. “That’s not the focus of that system.”

Penn and others noted that nearly all charges in adult court remain on a teenager’s permanent record, making it difficult if not impossible for an individual to find a job, obtain housing, attend college or even enlist in the military.

N.C. Rep. Paul Luebke, D-Durham, suggested that his colleagues in the General Assembly needed to be educated about juvenile justice.

“Understanding the extent to which the crimes [committed by 16- and 17-year-olds] are minor crimes, understanding the extent to which what gets into the headlines, the sensational case, is not a typical situation at all, leads many members just to, to not know at all really what’s going on with this, and the negative sides of treating teenagers really as adults and moving them into the adult system where there’s no opportunity for these young people to get the services that [Penn] referenced,” Luebke said.

Luebke is running for re-election in the House’s 30th District against Jason Chambers, a Republican. Morey is running unopposed for re-election for her seat on the bench; she has been tabbed to become the county’s next chief district judge.

Saturday’s event was sponsored by the Covenant for North Carolina’s Children and Action for Children North Carolina, two advocacy organizations that tend to identify with liberal positions.

Proponents of raising North Carolina’s juvenile court ceiling argue that the Tar Heel State is one of only two that automatically prosecute over-16s as adults and that services and supervision in the juvenile system are more appropriate for moral and practical reasons and more likely to prevent recidivism. They also claim that raising the ceiling would be more cost-effective over the long-term, despite short-term expenses that could be considerable.

Luebke expects the Assembly to consider legislation to raise the juvenile court age in 2011.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/10/24/757525/sbis-quick-field-work-leaves-behind.html

Published Sun, Oct 24, 2010 02:00 AM
Modified Sun, Oct 24, 2010 04:01 AM
SBI's quick field work leaves behind a mystery

WARRENTON SBI agents inspected 10-year-old Tyler Jones - his chin resting on a shotgun - and soon declared him a killer.

It was April 16, 2005, in a rural outpost in northeastern North Carolina. Tyler's mother, Glinda Pulley, lay lifeless in the bed above him, her face made unrecognizable by a shotgun blast.

The SBI dispatched a team to help the tiny Warren County Sheriff's Office. Among them: veteran agents Greg Tart and Blane Hicks.

To them, the case appeared open and shut. Tyler's thumb was on the trigger. A suicide note was stashed beneath the pillow cradling his mother's head. A CD with violent music by rapper 50 Cent was found in a nearby stereo.

By evening, less than seven hours after police had been called to Pulley's home, the SBI turned the house back over to the family.

An investigator broke the news to Tyler's father, Dan Jones: Tyler shot his mother, then killed himself. They told the same thing to a pathologist before autopsies began. The theory blasted across television news stations that night.

The swift conclusion shocked Warren County deputy Regina Nolan Thomas, the lead local detective.

"You don't walk into a scene and judge it right away," said Thomas, who left the sheriff's office in 2007. "You have to search every nook and cranny."

The SBI left a trail of evidence behind. Bloodied bedsheets and carpet remained. So did a shotgun pellet lodged in the wall in Pulley's bedroom. They almost missed the suicide note; the undertaker said he found it when he lifted Pulley's body. No one searched Tyler's bookbag from his mom's SUV.

Investigators also failed to notice that Pulley's fireproof lock box, where she kept important papers, was empty. Among the missing items: life insurance policies worth $700,000 that named as beneficiary the mother of Pulley's boyfriend, Dennis Carter.

For decades, the SBI has enjoyed the reputation of having the best and brightest law enforcement officers in North Carolina. Its field agents are dispatched to rural counties to help crack the toughest cases.

The quality and fairness of their work has been under attack this year, amid an N&O series highlighting some agents who cross ethical lines while investigating cases and some forensic scientists who push past the bounds of accepted science to deliver answers pleasing to prosecutors. In cases such as this one, local law enforcement officers have come to question judgments made by some SBI agents.

"The SBI really hamstrung us," Thomas said.

Thomas, who now works as a private investigator in Virginia, soon believed Tyler and his mother were both murdered. She would work in vain for years to try to put the case back on solid ground.

The SBI steps in

Just 60 miles north of Raleigh, Warren County is dotted with cotton fields and country stores. Fortune is rare, and so is violence.

Sheriff Johnny Williams keeps only 34 sworn deputies; no one is trained to process crime scenes. So, when Williams learned about the bloody mess near Alcoa, he called the SBI.

Tart was a highly ranked field agent, and Hicks was a lead agent, just a step below Tart. They were career agents who'd been climbing the ladder over the previous decade and would continue to rise in the years that followed.

Williams says he gave the SBI control and stayed out of their way. He said he's not sure what the SBI collected and what was tested.

Nearly five years later, Williams is still in the dark. He said he has been refused acopy of the SBI's report to the district attorney.

SBI spokeswoman Noelle Talley said the agency had been asked for help at the crime scene and later helped conduct a few interviews the following week; those results were shared with District Attorney Sam Currin. Talley said the agency would be happy to lend more help if asked by the sheriff or district attorney.

Williams technically considers the case still open, though no detective works the case day to day. He insists it was the SBI, not his office, that ruled the deaths a murder-suicide.

Since 2005, Williams and his detectives have brought evidence to Currin about a possible killer. It wasn't enough for Currin, Thomas and Williams said.

"He said the SBI had ruled it a murder-suicide, and unless he got a confession, he wouldn't touch it," Thomas said.

Currin could not be reached for comment.

Deputy's doubts grow

From the start, Thomas felt uneasy about Carter, Pulley's boyfriend. She found his behavior suspicious.

And, the more Thomas learned about Tyler, the more she doubted suicide. Family members told her that he doted on his mother, and he was so terrified of guns that he wet himself when he went hunting with relatives. He'd seemed fine at school the day before and was having a buddy sleep over that weekend.

Days after the SBI cleared the scene, Thomas said she asked the sheriff for permission to go back to Pulley's house.

"I was uncomfortable with the work done that [first] day, else I wouldn't have gone back the second time," Thomas said.

What she found on that second visit convinced Thomas that she was likely dealing with a double homicide. She declined to say what led her to that conclusion, saying she doesn't want to undermine the case should it ever be prosecuted.

Over the next several months, Thomas pursued Carter, according to search warrants and subpoenas.

The money

Thomas discovered $700,000 worth of life insurance policies that would have benefited Carter's family. The monthly premiums nearly exceeded Pulley's income.

Pulley designated Carter's mother, Edith Carter, as the beneficiary, a move her relatives find strange. They say Pulley barely knew Edith Carter and that she would have wanted to provide for her sons after her death. Dennis Carter controlled his mother's finances, paying everything from her church tithes to grocery bills, according to a search warrant.

Shortly before Pulley's death, someone identifying herself as Pulley faxed letters to the insurance companies asking them to keep quiet about the policyarrangements, according to a search warrant.

Days after the Pulley family buried Tyler and his mother, Dennis Carter asked funeral home director Lawrence Boyd for a copy of Glinda Pulley's death certificate. Boyd said he refused. Dennis Carter then tried to secure one from the Register of Deeds, according to the warrant.

Carter has previously been accused of financial misdeeds. He was charged with insurance fraud and fraudulently burning a building, but those charges were dismissed.

The State Department of Insurance opened an investigation in September into Dennis Carter relating to Pulley's life insurance policies. The department declined to discuss the details of investigation, but investigators opened the case after receiving a complaint from a crime scene expert hired by Pulley's family.

Efforts to interview Dennis Carter failed.

Competing claims

In 2006, Nationwide Insurance asked a Superior Court judge for guidance on how to pay out the $450,000 owed on Pulley's life insurance policy. Edith Carter, the named beneficiary, staked a claim. So did Danny Jones, Pulley's oldest son. When Pulley died, bill collectors started seeking payments from Jones.

In 2006, Jones and Carter agreed to split the insurance payout. Jones used his share to settle his mom's debts.

The family is unsure how another $250,000 policy with the Farm Bureau was resolved; Edith Carter was named as the beneficiary on that policy.

The Pulley family is confounded by the lingering mystery of Pulley's and Tyler's deaths. For years, family members stopped by the sheriff's office each week for an update. When Thomas left the sheriff's office in 2007, another detective took interest for a while. He, too, left. Since then, the Pulley family says inquiries have largely been met with silence.

Thomas said she feels guilty that the case stalled after she left. "I really thought I'd get the family some closure one way or another," she said.

In 2008, a lawyer hired by Carter asked that computers and financial records and other items seized during Thomas' search of Carter's home in 2005 be returned. The district attorney consented.

Dad's plea unanswered

Dan Jones, Tyler's father and a sheriff's deputy in Halifax County, wrote to Attorney General Roy Cooper pleading for help. In the letter, Jones insisted his son was not a murderer and warned that a killer lurks in the community. Jones said he has never received a reply.

"The SBI is supposed to be the best we have in the state. ... I'm not pleased with the investigation they did," Jones said. "They didn't seem to care."

Meanwhile, Tart and Hicks have flourished at the SBI. In 2009, Tart was promoted to district supervisor, where he supervises dozens of field agents in several counties, including Wake and Johnston. Hicks is an assistant special agent in charge.

This year, Hicks has been helping the SBI's Internal Affairs unit, investigating the work of maligned agents. Among those he's investigating for the SBI: Duane Deaver, a former lab analyst blamed with withholding blood test results that raised questions about dozens of cases.
mandy.locke@newsobserver.com or 919-829-8927
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-15/1287915636125740.xml&coll=1

An NOPD program that turned around renegade officers was inexplicably cut
Sunday, October 24, 2010
By Brendan McCarthy
Staff writer

The bad news for the New Orleans Police Department had reached a crescendo, with headlines trumpeting officers' misdeeds almost every day. There were robberies, drug deals, murder -- even an orchestrated assassination.

It was 1995, and there was a new police chief, Richard Pennington, an outsider who promised to professionalize the police force. One pillar of his plan was an early warning system that would flag and track problematic officers. Cops who received complaints would attend classes, undergo counseling, talk about their misgivings and analyze their missteps.

The so-called Professional Performance Enhancement Program was part of a wave of like-minded efforts across the country aimed at ramping up police accountability and rooting out problem officers.

Early warning systems work, experts declared -- and there was evidence they were right. In the NOPD, complaints against officers who completed the program dropped 63 percent in the two years following their stint in the program, according to a federally funded 2000 study. NOPD officials declared the nascent program a success.

Yet slowly and quietly, the promising early warning program devolved into a toothless disciplinary tool, according to five retired ranking officers who worked within it.

The length of the class was cut from 32 hours to eight hours. Supervisors were no longer required to perform lengthy follow-up checks on at-risk officers. And the program's database fell apart after Katrina, making it impossible to track problem officers -- or even determine who had been through the program.

In 2009, a scaled-down version of the early warning system was reinstituted. By then, complaints against NOPD officers had skyrocketed. In 2009, twice as many complaints against officers were filed than were filed per year in the late 1990s.

Even as the NOPD program was falling apart, departments elsewhere across the country were ramping up their own early warning programs. In 2001, the federal Department of Justice recommended that all law enforcement agencies implement them.

The collapse of NOPD's program has a special urgency given the department's fragile state. This year, 21 officers, some with lengthy complaint histories, have been charged with federal crimes.

And as in the mid-1990s, the spotlight is on a new police chief -- a Pennington disciple -- who promises big changes, including a reinvigorated early warning system. Some say it should be a top priority.

"If the program had continued to operate the way it was, we wouldn't be in the situation we are in right now," said Elmon Randolph, who ran the NOPD program for several years. "We would have weeded out more of what we needed to weed out. We would have been able to monitor these issues."

A high priority again

Just assessing the state of the early warning program today is difficult.

Department officials cannot say when the 32-hour class requirement was dropped, when supervisors stopped filling out evaluations or how many officers have been through the system. The computer system cannot track cases or assess officers.

Arlinda Westbrook, the new civilian leader of the internal affairs unit, said the program is still in place, though she acknowledged it's nowhere near as robust as it once was.

"It lapsed in terms of the best-practices Public Integrity Bureau we knew in the '90s," she said.

She's not sure how or why.

Westbrook, who is just four months into her job, said a revitalized early warning program will become a cornerstone of the NOPD's new push for accountability. It will likely have to be: The Justice Department is expected to insist on it.

Police Superintendent Ronal Serpas, who was a deputy chief during the 1990s and is acutely aware of the early warning program, has said fixing the program is a top priority.

It is being "revitalized and retooled by using some methods utilized under the old system and integrating best practices research from other early warning systems nationwide," Serpas said in a released statement. "Our goal is to bring the program back to the national model it once was."

The city has already put out for bid a contract for a computerized monitoring system that would track not only complaints, but also each officer's vehicle pursuits, firearm discharges, awards and commendations and more.

Class was 4 days, 32 hours

The NOPD's early warning system was conceptualized just before Pennington's arrival in 1994. The new chief made it a priority. Exactly 90 days into his tenure, he called Assistant Superintendent Felix Loicano into his office. "Pennington said, 'I want it done now,' " Loicano recalled.

It was not designed to be a disciplinary tool. Police officials, both past and present, say the concept is to analyze misbehavior and retrain officers who make routine mistakes. A well-run program could save an officer's career -- and save the city millions of dollars in civil judgments.

The system, run by the Public Integrity Bureau, flags officers who receive three non-sustained "abuse-type complaints" within a year. It also flags officers with one sustained complaint.

The class used to take four days, 32 hours in all. Lecturers analyzed human behavior, social problems and occupational stress. Officers reviewed real incidents from internal affairs files and discussed how tense situations could have been handled better.

Every officer met with a psychologist to discuss why he or she was in the class. Cops watched movies -- including Sandra Bullock's "28 Days," "The Untouchables" and "A Few Good Men" -- and talked about their lessons.

Once an officer completed the curriculum, a six-month oversight period began. Supervisors were required to write biweekly reviews of the officer's interactions with the public.

It seemed to work. The average number of complaints against NOPD officers who entered the program dropped by 63 percent in the two years after they completed the curriculum, according to a landmark 2000 study that analyzed early warning systems in New Orleans and two other cities.

Punishment for hard work?

The study found a seeming contradiction: The officers who wound up in the program were more likely to use force on people -- yet they were also more likely to be promoted.

While the study showed the program produced results, that doesn't mean officers took to it.

Many officers in the class "expressed extreme hostility" toward the program, saying they were being punished for working hard. Most cops were extremely proud of their "high activity" levels and viewed citizen complaints as an inevitable byproduct of active policing.

"The officers expressed particular resentment over the fact that the department singled them out (for retraining) but did nothing about other officers, who, in their view, did no real police work at all," the study noted.

One officer in the program criticized "community policing officers" who "shot basketballs" with citizens all day. Others developed a persecution complex. "We're like the black people of the 1960s," one officer told researchers.

Sam Walker, a University of Nebraska at Omaha professor and co-author of the study, said the group setting helped give the program a "bad-boy" image, which some officers celebrated.

"It reminded people of junior high detention," Walker said. "What really surprised me was how aggressive they were about how they were good cops. They made arrests. They thought that was the ideal."

The outward hostility to the program may have been a form of groupthink. The study found that despite what officers said in class, they gave the program high marks in anonymous critiques.

Conflict with commanders

But many high-ranking NOPD commanders, particularly district commanders, were less than thrilled with the early warning program. Its mission seemed to conflict directly with the NOPD's push on officers to attain high arrest numbers. Commanders wanted the most aggressive officers out on the street making collars, not sitting in class learning how to interact better with the public, said Richard Drouant, a former supervisor who bolstered and ran the program in the late 1990s,

"The commanders use these stat-producers," Drouant said. "They ride the officer till the end, without any interest in their well-being. And when the officer is past saving, when they are burnt out, the commander will let them go and bring in a new officer.

"The rank never bought into (the program) because it worked against their interest. And they'd rather take the heat for missteps, as well as any other products that may result of it. They felt that anything we did was just stamping the officers' enthusiasm."

Debra Randolph, who took over the program in 2005 after her husband, Elmon Randolph, retired from the position, said the desire of police brass for high arrest statistics killed the program.

"The department was worried about numbers," she said. "No one ever came out and said, 'Do it this way,' but the understanding was, 'Get me numbers any way you can.' "

Elmon Randolph said novice cops were often led astray by their supervisors.

"Part of the problem I saw with a lot of young cops: They didn't have leaders, they had enablers," Randolph said. "They were working for older police officers who were enabling them to continue bad behavior. Their attitude was, go out there and get the job done no matter what. It was, 'Forget the rules. We are gonna win.' "

Flooded out

Despite the program's weaknesses, all five of the former officers involved in running it expressed remorse at its evisceration, which was completed by Katrina.

In the flood, the NOPD's database for tracking complaints and files pertaining to officer disciplinary histories were lost or damaged. Higher-ups were in no rush to restart the program, according to Debra Randolph. She said higher-ranking commanders told her the department was "going in a different direction."

It wasn't until mid-2009 that any semblance of a monitoring system returned. But the revived program could barely be considered an early warning system.

The program now forces any officer who receives a complaint of discourtesy or lack of professionalism to attend a daylong seminar. Starting in August 2009, about 35 officers attended a courtesy class each month, according to NOPD data. No officer has been reassigned under the monitoring program.

Experts scoff at the set-up. "That doesn't meet my view of what an effective system is," Walker said.

Anthony Radosti of the watchdog Metropolitan Crime Commission said the NOPD in recent years seemed more concerned with ducking liability issues and potential criminal violations than enacting concrete reform.

"Complaints weren't thoroughly investigated," Radosti said. "Many times it was a cursory review."

Nonetheless, remedies are under way, Radosti said. He credited the appointment of Westbrook, the new leader of the Public Integrity Bureau, and the involvement of the Justice Department. Complaints to the Metropolitan Crime Commission about the NOPD's internal affairs unit have dropped exponentially in recent months.

"They are taking things more seriously over there," Radosti said.

For her part, Westbrook said change is on the horizon.

"It's difficult when you ask a new administration to speak to what happened in the past," she noted. "We are doomed to repeat it if I don't figure it out."

. . . . . . .

Brendan McCarthy can be reached at bmccarthy@timespicayune.com or 504.826.3301.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://justice4nifong.blogspot.com/2010/10/protection-against-consequences-of-free.html

Sunday, October 24, 2010
Protection against the consequences of free speech and opinion are not guaranteed
One of the tenets upon which our country was founded, and upon which we most highly cherish, is the freedom of speech… the right to express one’s opinion. We, Americans, may surely speak our minds on any number of issues without fear of incarceration or persecution by the government, but we must deal with the consequences of our expression. Neither the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution protects citizens from any retaliation that may be lodged against someone for speaking their mind, expressing their beliefs, or, unfortunately, even having an opinion. Because potential retribution looms for whoever possesses or subscribes to an unpopular position on a controversial topic, it tends to mute contrary expression and/or public dialog on that particular subject. Bottom line is that the potential for suffering consequences for certain thoughts and opinions are routinely kept in check out of fear of being subjected to backlash.

This matter came to the nation’s awareness recently when NPR (National Public Radio) commentator Juan Williams stated during an interview with Fox News that he was uncomfortable whenever he saw Muslims dressed in their traditional garb on airplanes. NPR executives viewed this comment as being unethical and undermining his credibility. Personally, I do not share the same phobia as Mr. Williams regarding Muslims traveling by air, and I did not find his remarks to be offensive. He was merely stating an opinion of his, which I felt had no relevance to his credibility. NPR should not have focused on this benign, but candid expression of Mr. Williams. Certainly, he should not have been fired… at least in my opinion.

Fear of retaliation for taking a position is very real in this country and can be best exemplified by the Nifong-phobia. There is no doubt in my mind that the majority of intelligent and sensible people in North Carolina are of the opinion that Mike Nifong was selectively and unjustly disbarred (especially in consideration that he is the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar since its inception in 1933). However, the play given to the topic by the mainstream media and the punitive, draconian, and irrational treatment of former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong by the Attorney General’s Office and other state agencies, makes it clear to the well-informed that to take a side with Mr. Nifong is to possibly invite serious and catastrophic results… the most feared being loss of employment. There are many attorneys who are of the opinion that Mr. Nifong was unjustly disbarred, but they are not going to publicly say so because they realize to do so would put their license to practice law in serious jeopardy by the unregulated and out of control State Bar. Civil rights leaders and religious leaders in their pulpits avoid taking on the injustice to Mr. Nifong out of fear of losing financing and donations, support, and/or tithe.

What sets aside the Mike Nifong issue from many others in the arena of public discourse is the fact that the media has defined the debate by taking a position and pushing it on the public. This drive to destroy Mr. Nifong was spearheaded by Rae Evans, mother of Duke Lacrosse defendant Dave Evans. She held an executive position with CBS News for more than a decade, but this has never been disclosed during her appearances on CBS’s “60 Minutes” program, and the media has been hush-hush on the topic, as well. The PR and media blitz by the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse families have produced a jihad against Mr. Nifong that is complete and without comparison. So successful has the media been in defining what opinions and expressions about Mr. Nifong and the Duke Lacrosse case are acceptable, and what positions carry untold risks, that the state’s director of the American Civil Liberties Union is afraid to express her opinion on the topic. A couple of years ago at a public debate on freedom of speech at NCSU, I asked the ACLU’s Katy Parker, to opine in writing about Mr. Nifong’s disbarment, specifically asking if his actions were as egregious as other prosecutors who had not been disbarred. She was aware that I was a supporter of Mr. Nifong, and when I handed her the questionnaire, I asked her if she was going to fill it out. She responded, “It depends on the questions.” Evidently, she did not like the questions as she did not respond (I even enclosed a self-addressed stamped envelope). But neither did the three other law school professors at event to whom I personally gave the questionnaire.

This is very telling, because an agency like the ACLU which is willing to protect the civil and constitutional rights of Nazis and Ku Klux Klanners is afraid to go up against the powerful Carpetbaggers by expressing its opinions about Mr. Nifong’s disbarment. Mr. Nifong’s unjust disbarment is a topic that is even off-limits at law schools. Law professors, even with tenure, are unwilling to breach the topic in a public forum. It is evident why the subject of Mr. Nifong is institutionally and universally taboo… because Mike Nifong’s disbarment was selective and unjust. This is a conclusion that anyone using a modicum of rational thought and knowledge of the issue would reach.

Elected public officials, who are compromised by their lust for public approval, display absolutely no courage when it comes to taking a public stand on the issue of Mike Nifong’s disbarment. Although the First Amendment protects their right to express an opinion on the subject, they undoubtedly act like politicians by cloaking their unwillingness to discuss the issue by pleading that the protocol in place restricts their ability to comment.

The heat surrounding the topic of Mike Nifong’s disbarment is so high that even having a view that is supportive of Mr. Nifong can lead to mistreatment. It happened to me at Duke University School of Law in April 14, 2010, when I attended an event which was open to the public. I was kicked off the campus, for no reason other than being a supporter of justice for Mr. Nifong. The attack against me by Duke was premeditated, malicious, and unwarranted, and illustrates the depth of contempt that has been generated by the media and the state against Mr. Nifong and his supporters. A university, especially one of Duke’s stature - not to mention that it is law school, should be a beacon for independent thought, opinion, and ideas. Debate on differing views should be welcome in such an academic environment. I’m sure that, generally speaking, it is on the Duke campus. But, again, when it comes to the topic of Mr. Nifong, open expression or even privately held opinion supportive of Mr. Nifong is squelched. Because I believe that Mr. Nifong was selectively and unjustly disbarred I was nearly arrested.

Tar Heelians, especially in Durham, know the score and are timid when it comes to speaking out on behalf of Mike Nifong. They realize that doing so could cost them a promotion, opportunity, or even their jobs and livelihood. The vindictive reach of the Carpetbagger Jihad is long, strong, and venomous. That is what makes members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong special. Each individual member has the conviction, and courage to back it up, to lend his/her name and face to the cause of obtaining justice for Mr. Nifong. Justice for Mike Nifong can be defined by action on part of the North Carolina State Bar to unilaterally and unconditionally reinstate Mike Nifong’s license to practice law in the state without restrictions. And that is the goal of our committee, which has been in existence since June 2008.

Like Juan Williams, I have experienced backlash because of my position in support of Mr. Nifong… discrimination against me and my near-arrest on the Duke University campus in April 2010, being one of the more recent. Because of the fear of retaliation, the Powers-That-Be, especially with the assistance of the media, will continue to determine what opinions the citizens of this state are considered acceptable to harbor and/or express. For those who elect to give an opinion that is not held in the mainstream, brace yourself and prepare to suffer retribution. Keep in mind that expression of opinion is free, but you oft times will end up paying the consequences for doing so.
Posted by Nifong Supporter at 11:02 AM
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kerri P.
Member Avatar

Can't the folks for J4N stop their damn whinning. It's getting old already.
Edited by Kerri P., Oct 24 2010, 07:33 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2010/10/everson.html

Duke Senior Drew Everson Dies Following Accident


Memorial service to be held Wednesday in Duke Chapel

Sunday, October 24, 2010


DURHAM, N.C. -- Drew Everson, a Duke University senior from Tampa, Fla., died Sunday following an accidental fall behind the East Union Building on Friday morning.

Everson's family, including his brother A.J. who graduated from Duke in 2009, was with him at Duke Hospital at the time of his death.

"Drew leaves behind many, many friends throughout the Duke community," Larry Moneta, the university's vice president for student affairs, wrote in a message to students. "It saddens me greatly to share such tragic news and I hope we can all comfort each other as needed."

The university is planning a memorial service in Duke Chapel at noon, Wednesday, Oct. 27, followed by a reception in the Scharf Commons area adjacent to Cameron Indoor Stadium.

President Richard Brodhead and other university officials have been providing support to Everson's family and friends. Two Student Affairs officials, Sue Wasiolek and Todd Adams, stayed at the hospital with the family throughout their two days at the hospital. On Sunday afternoon, students gathered in the Devil's Den on campus to offer support to each other. The campus has made counselors available to provide care and support to Everson's friends and others. Interested students should contact Duke Police at 684-2444 and ask for the dean on call.

"The death of a student is the saddest moment for a university, and our thoughts and prayers go out to Drew's family and friends, and to the many people at Duke whose lives he touched," said Michael Schoenfeld, vice president for public affairs and government relations.

A political science major, Everson spent the past summer in New York working as an intern with Goldman Sachs. He was recently weighing job offers to pursue after graduation this spring. He was a member of Pi Kappa Phi and the Duke Debate Team and served as a line monitor for Duke Men's Basketball.

Everson was found outside the East Campus building at 11:30 a.m. on Friday. Duke Police and Durham EMS responded immediately, transporting him to Duke Hospital. The investigation so far has determined that his injuries were the result of a tragic but accidental fall. No further details will be available until the review is completed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply