| Blog and Media Roundup - Saturday, August 24, 2013; News Roundup | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 24 2013, 03:56 AM (368 Views) | |
| abb | Aug 24 2013, 03:56 AM Post #1 |
|
http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2013/08/23/voter-id-law-impact-college-voting Voter ID law to impact college voting By Georgia Parke | August 23, 2013 A new North Carolina law will alter the way students will vote—or not vote—while attending Duke. Members of the Duke community are still assessing the obstacles to student voting imposed by the voter ID law, which Gov. Pat McCrory signed Aug. 12. House Bill 589 ushered into the state a wide range of voting procedures and restrictions—among them, a reduction of early voting as well as the termination of same-day voter registration, pre-registration for high school students and the use of college identifications as acceptable forms of voter identification. “No matter what your party affiliation is, you have to change your voter behavior,” said junior Derek Rhodes, Duke Student Government vice president for Durham and regional affairs. “We will feel a decrease in student participation in the election.” The acceptable forms of identification for registering to vote are state- or federally-issued photo IDs, such as North Carolina drivers licenses’, U.S. passports and Veteran Identification cards. Out-of-state drivers’ licenses can only be used to register within 90 days of an election. College IDs are no longer permitted as forms of ID when registering to vote. The law reduces the amount of early voting allowed to “no earlier than the second Thursday before an election.” This cuts the period of early voting from 17 days to 10 days. Rhodes noted that this will bring into question the practicality of having an on-campus early voting location for future elections, due to cost and logistical issues. The University will have to weigh the costs of providing the on-campus voting—the expense of hosting the site, the necessary parking accommodations, security for confidential voter information—against the benefits of a little over a week of early voting. “We have to look at, within the timeframe they’ve allowed for early voting, would it be worth the cost?” he said. “Early voting is important, but we have to look at what they will allow us to have. On campus, we don’t know what that looks like.” Richard Engstrom, a research associate at Duke’s Center for the Study of Race, Ethnicity and Gender in the Social Sciences, also noted that if the law leads to fewer campuses hosting early voting, it will pose challenges for students and community members looking for a voting site. “It’s not just the IDs, it’s also having access to polling places,” Engstrom said. “What we may see from the county boards of election represents a serious attack on student voting.” The law also eliminates straight-party voting, as well as pre-registration for 16- and 17-year old residents. In a press release earlier this month, the governor's office attributed this to the “bureaucratic burden” that comes with re-certifying the underage voters upon their 18th birthdays. Rhodes said that the pre-registration prohibition prevents younger people from becoming excited about participating in elections. The law prohibits same-day voter registration during early voting, a feature that was present at last year’s on-campus voting site. It also bans counties from extending voting hours on Election Day to accommodate voters who arrive after the polling time has closed. Engstrom said it is too soon to tell if the law will decrease student voting in a way that significantly affects the outcomes of elections. “It depends on how competitive the election is,” Engstrom said. “Student polling tends to be much more heavily Democratic than Republican.” DSG and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Student Government aligned to release a joint statement in opposition of the bill before it was passed, citing specifically the impact the legislation would have on the voting practices of college students who vote at school. “The [legislation] is saddening and harmful to the process of college student participation in the political process,” read the August 5 post on the DSG blog. “This legislation disregards over 20,000 students in North Carolina, who value their chance to participate in politics.” The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation and the Durham-based Southern Coalition for Social Justice filed a lawsuit against the legislation. |
 |
 
|
| abb | Aug 24 2013, 03:59 AM Post #2 |
|
http://blogs.findlaw.com/fourth_circuit/2013/08/dist-court-dismisses-duke-lacrosse-lawsuit-against-nifong-aide.html Dist. Court Dismisses Duke Lacrosse Lawsuit Against Nifong Aide By William Peacock, Esq. on August 20, 2013 2:55 PM If you thought the federal case resulting from the malicious prosecution of the Duke Lacrosse team was over with last year's Fourth Circuit defeat, well, you're close. It's near-dead, and now even nearer with last week's ruling by U.S. District Court Judge James Beaty, Jr. According to the Herald Sun, the district court dismissed claims by 38 lacrosse players against an investigator, Linwood Wilson, formerly employed by now-disbarred and forever disgraced former District Attorney Mike Nifong. The ruling should come as no surprise to these players: their attorney conceded that the plain language of last year's Fourth Circuit ruling foreclosed their federal claims. Because the 38 players in the present case did not join the three players who are currently appealing that Fourth Circuit decision, Judge Beaty refused to hold their case in abeyance while a completely separate case was pending on appeal. Facts Recapped An exotic dancer, quite inconsistently, claimed over the course of a few hours in 2007 that three, no zero, no twenty lacrosse players sexually assaulted her at a Duke lacrosse team party. Despite the lack of evidence, the inconsistent allegations, and Nifong's own assessment of the case ("You know, we're f**ked."), the prosecution pressed forward against three players, and investigated the entire team, breaking more than two dozen rules of professional conduct, and getting Nifong disbarred in the process. Fourth Circuit's Crushing Blow As we explained last year, the Fourth Circuit tossed the entirety of the student-athletes' federal claims against the City of Durham and its police department. That left a single state law claim to pursue, and for the three players that were actually charged with a crime, malicious prosecution claims in state court. Present Proceedings From that point on, the cases of the various student-athletes splintered. Three students, who were charged and later exonerated, are seeking Supreme Court intervention, reports the Sun. Three others, who were similarly situated to the present thirty-eight athletes who were not charged, are also appealing to the Supreme Court. These thirty-eight, however, seem to have reached the end of the road, at least in federal court. Their state law claim, a catch-all, civil rights, equal protection under the law claim under the North Carolina constitution, is often used as a fallback for plaintiffs whose federal claims are dismissed, according to the Sun. As for the former investigator, he remains a defendant in the lawsuits brought by the six students who are seeking Supreme Court relief. Related Resources: Looking Back at the Duke Lacrosse Case (Duke University) SCOTUS Rejects Cuccinelli's Stay Request on Va. Sodomy Ruling (FindLaw's Fourth Circuit Blog) Duke Lacrosse Accuser Crystal Mangum Stabs Man? (FindLaw's Blotter Blog) |
|
|
|
| abb | Aug 24 2013, 04:00 AM Post #3 |
|
http://www.heraldsun.com/news/x2042201563/City-urges-Supreme-Court-to-reject-lacrosse-case City urges Supreme Court to reject lacrosse case Aug. 23, 2013 @ 07:56 PM Ray Gronberg The Herald-Sun Discounting claims of a philosophical dispute among federal judges, lawyers for the city on Friday urged the U.S. Supreme Court to avoid getting involved in the first of the lawsuits spawned by the Duke lacrosse case. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals late last year “properly rejected” the attempts of three former Duke players to hold the city responsible for the actions of a state official, former District Attorney Mike Nifong, they said. City lawyers were weighing in at the request of the Supreme Court’s nine justices, who are considering a petition from former Duke players David Evans, Colin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann that asks them to overturn the 4th Circuit’s ruling. The three were indicted on rape charges in 2006 after stripper Crystal Mangum claimed that she’d been attacked at a lacrosse-team party. A year later, they were exonerated when N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper determined the charges were false. The players’ subsequent lawsuit contends that police and Nifong conspired to frame them and thus violated their civil rights. But the 4th Circuit agreed with the city’s contention that it’s not liable because Nifong and a grand jury, independent of police, decided there was probable cause to support the charges. Their decisions, in lawyers’ parlance and the 4th Circuit’s opinion, “broke the chain” of events that has to run from the beginning to the end of a prosecution for a subsequent civil-rights lawsuit to hold up. In petitioning for Supreme Court review, the players and their attorneys argued that the 4th Circuit’s view of the chain-of-events doctrine isn’t necessarily shared by other federal appeals courts. The claim of a “circuit split” is a standard way to convince justices to include the case on the list of a few dozen that will receive a full-on hearing during their 2013-14 term, instead of rejecting it along with thousands of other pending petitions. City lawyers, however, on Friday said there’s no circuit split. The players’ legal team “has not cited, and cannot cite, a single case in which a court has ruled that police can be held liable for a prosecutor’s decision to seek an indictment without evidence the police misled or pressured the prosecutor into making that decision,” they said. Lawyers for the players, in arguing otherwise, pointed in the spring to decisions by 6th and 2nd U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals. But the city contends that those cases aren’t on point. The 6th Circuit case involved a police officer who withheld evidence from a prosecutor, and the 2nd Circuit case didn’t even involve a police officer, city lawyers said. They added that the key issue in the lacrosse litigation is that police, even by the players’ account, “fully disclosed all the evidence” they had to Nifong and did not in any way pressure him to prosecute. Though the players allege a conspiracy between Nifong and police, their argument is one that can expose authorities to liability any time there’s an unsuccessful prosecution of a criminal defendant, they said. “Since prosecutors are often involved in investigations – meeting with police to review evidence, determine additional areas for investigation and discuss trial preparation – it would not be difficult for plaintiffs to characterize such action as a ‘conspiracy,’” the city brief said. Friday’s brief is the first of two the city’s legal team will be filing with the Supreme Court. The second will address a separate lawsuit and petition filed by a trio of former players represented by Durham lawyer Bon Ekstrand. It is due on Aug. 30. The city’s team includes Raleigh attorney Reggie Gillespie and four lawyers from an international law firm originally brought in by the city’s insurer. |
|
|
|
| abb | Aug 24 2013, 04:02 AM Post #4 |
|
http://www.wate.com/story/23242783/newsoms-and-christians Newsom and Christian families traveling to be interviewed by Glenn Beck Posted: Aug 23, 2013 4:48 PM CST Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom were murdered in January 2007. Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom were murdered in January 2007. After discussing the murders on his radio, TV and online shows, Glenn Beck is flying the Christians and Newsom families to Texas to appear on his shows. (source: The Blaze) After discussing the murders on his radio, TV and online shows, Glenn Beck is flying the Christians and Newsom families to Texas to appear on his shows. (source: The Blaze) Hugh and Mary Newsom say discussing the gruesome murders again won't bring them more pain because they think about what happened to Channon and Chris everyday anyway. Hugh and Mary Newsom say discussing the gruesome murders again won't bring them more pain because they think about what happened to Channon and Chris everyday anyway. By STEPHANIE BEECKEN 6 News Reporter KNOXVILLE (WATE) - Knoxville media has extensively covered the Christian Newsom trials and retrials for years, but the case hasn't gained much national media attention until recently. Lemaricus Davidson, Letalvis Cobbins, George Thomas and Vanessa Coleman have all been convicted for their roles in the 2007 murders in Knoxville. Last week on Glenn Beck's radio program, the topic discussed was Oprah and President Obama publicizing racial tensions in some cases and not others. A caller asked why the murders of Chris Newsom and Channon Christian have been ignored. Beck looked into it and aired a segment about the murders. On Glenn Beck's program on "The Blaze," Beck said, "The names the woman gave me were Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian. Likely they mean as much to you as they did to me but you'll never forget them after the next few minutes. Probably the first time you heard about them tonight." Beck has now asked the Christians and Newsoms to fly to his studio to do a show. The Newsoms tell 6 News they want to share with the country what happened to Channon and Chris. They are glad to have the opportunity to go on Glenn Beck's shows. They say discussing the gruesome murders again won't bring them more pain because they think about what happened to Channon and Chris everyday anyway. Mary and Hugh Newsom and Deena and Gary Christian will be in Dallas Tuesday to tape a segment for Glenn Beck's radio, TV and online programs. The victim's families want to share what happened to their children with the country. The Newsoms say the coverage is better late than never. "It's a forum we can speak out on via the Glenn Beck show and we are going to seize every advantage we can obtain due to the bias networks not wanting to report it," said Hugh Newsom. In Glenn Beck's first story last week about the Christian Newsom case, he said the crime was beyond violent, but did not gain national attention because it didn't fit into a special interest group's agenda. "If you don't fall into a group that has an Al Sharpton group hounding the media, well then you're all out of luck. Why wasn't this story given real coverage? Because the victims were young and white, a couple in a nice car. The killers were four black men and a black woman," said Beck. The Newsoms agree. "If it would have been white on black, it would have been a headline, a breaking news story. But since this was black on white, [people] don't talk about it," said Hugh Newsom. Mary Newsom hopes others hear about the case and are more aware of their surroundings. "We need to let the people know what happened and this is the only way that we are going to let everyone know what could happen to innocent kids out there and that it could happen to anybody," said Mary Newsom. The Newsoms don't know what Beck will ask them but hope to share their feelings about the case, the lack of national coverage and their issues with the justice system. "The victims have no rights. The criminals have all the rights and people don't know that until you get involved with it," said Mary Newsom. The cases will be discussed on Glenn Beck's radio program and his TV and online shows on The Blaze. According to the Christians, a portion of the interview will run on theblaze.com Tuesday. |
|
|
|
| cks | Aug 24 2013, 07:50 AM Post #5 |
|
Yes, the case should have been front page in every newspaper of the country. I am glad that Beck is making this effort. |
|
|
|
| abb | Aug 24 2013, 05:20 PM Post #6 |
|
http://wtkr.com/2013/08/19/coast-to-serve-two-months-for-committing-perjury/ Elizabeth Coast to serve two months for committing perjury Posted on: 3:09 pm, August 19, 2013, by Holly Henry and Reed Andrews, updated on: 06:02am, August 20, 2013 Elizabeth Coast will serve two months in jail for committing perjury after lying about a sexual assault from Jonathan Montgomery. The Commonwealth Attorney wanted Coast to serve four years, the same amount of time Montgomery had served. Coast cried repeatedly during her sentencing hearing and her lawyer tried to portray her as a naive, then 17-year-old who feared her parents. Coast says she never thought the lie would hurt Montgomery, and only said it was him because he had moved out of the area. Coast has to pay $90,000 in restitution to Montgomery. The now 23-year-old will be locked up every weekend for the next seven months. Coast says, “I never forgot, I never forgot about Jonathan. It wrecked my life.” |
|
|
|
| Quasimodo | Aug 24 2013, 05:59 PM Post #7 |
|
Evidently the judge didn't think what she did was a serious crime, which inflicted serious injury, and deserved serious jail time. |
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |
11:40 AM Jul 13