Breaking: North Carolina State Bar Finds Nifong Guilty of Ethics Violations (UPDATE: Nifong Disbarred)
Not that it’s a huge shock, but Nifong has just been found guilty of lying to the judge, hiding evidence, and lying to the defense attorneys:
[T]he bar’s three member disciplinary panel unanimously found Nifong guilty of fraud, dishonesty, deceit, or misrepresentation; of making false statements of material fact before a judge; of making false statements of material fact before Bar investigators, and of lying about withholding exculpatory DNA evidence.
I think he will be disbarred.
UPDATE: As I have long predicted, Nifong has been disbarred.
Disbarred? He deserves more than that. Is there ANY violation of law at all that he can be charged with? Is there no other punishment for what he did? What about lawyers fees for the families of the accused? Any hope that they can get relief for the money they spent? He’s resigning? Why wasn’t he fired? You “think” he will be disbarred? You mean he may not be? I’m just shaking my head.
Lori (3f0b71) — 6/16/2007 @ 11:05 amLori,
He may also face criminal charges; we’re just talking now about the action the Bar will take.
He wasn’t fired because he was elected. He would have to have been recalled.
Patterico (2a65a5) — 6/16/2007 @ 11:10 amI forgot he was elected. I should have remembered that because I did read the stories about how he was only appointed because he said he wouldn’t run for election. I guess that was his first “mistake”.
So there are ways to deal with prosecutors who do the types of things Nifong did? He really should be made an example of because this is such a high profile case, and what he did is not unheard of. He just picked the wrong case to do it.
It’s too bad that those three boys will always have the label of rapist after their names. It will never go away for them. Even after they were deemed “innocent”, there are still people who believe they “got off” because their parents have money. Go to any message board today and you’ll see it. Nifong needs to answer for that a lot more than just retiring on his government pension.
Lori (3f0b71) — 6/16/2007 @ 11:22 amAnd kudos to KC Johnson of Durham In Wonderland blog; if there were Pulitzers for blogging, he would richly deserve the first one.
Robert (91f2c5) — 6/16/2007 @ 11:32 amI wonder what happened to the Tawana Brawley wannabe that started the whole sorry affair? I believe Nifong piggybacked his reelection campaign on the racial overtones this case presented. The Duke faculty picked up the ball and ran gladly with it until it unraveled like the cheap suit it was. The Media pimps spun the tale of over-indulged rich kids, probably Republican, who were rabid racists.
Al this based on the false charges from a black pole dancer with kids at home to feed. Unbelievable, particularly when all involved thought nobody would ever discover the truth.
These people were either nitwits or we haven’t heard the entire story yet.
David Hampton (de5a83) — 6/16/2007 @ 12:48 pmI second that. KC has done an incredible job of both covering and analyzing this whole affair. He’s done it better than anyone, including anyone in the MSM.
Pablo (99243e) — 6/16/2007 @ 12:58 pmAnd he’s apparently waived his right to appeal.
While I’m not sure it’s entirely over, it’s good to see this schmuck suffer some consequences.
X_LA_Native (740ee9) — 6/16/2007 @ 1:20 pmNifong has been disbarred.
DRJ (2d5e62) — 6/16/2007 @ 1:50 pmI just read an article at Townhall that said the players lawyers are going to pursue “criminal contempt” charges against Nifong next week. What does that mean? I find it hard to fathom that Nifong didn’t break some law by going for an indictment when he knew he had no evidence. The fact that he got that indictment isn’t all that surprising. I’m from Rhode Island and there was a famous case a few years ago where a famous lawyer was quoted as saying “you can indict a ham sandwich”. Or something like that. I can’t remember it exactly, but this case pretty much proves it’s true. It would be funny if it weren’t so outrageous.
Lori (3f0b71) — 6/16/2007 @ 2:43 pmLori,
Yeah, but you can only indict Buddy Cianci in federal court. 😉
Pablo (99243e) — 6/16/2007 @ 3:02 pmAt the beginning, Nifong DID have evidence. He had a victim who claimed she had been sexually assaulted, four of her broken fingernails in the fraternity house, and a SANE nurse who said her condition was consistent with a sexual trauma. And let’s not forget the neighbor who heard one of the fun-loving boys yelling after these two women, “Thank your grandaddy for my cotton shirt.”
Nifong is a jerk. He used this case for publicity and it blew up in his face. He should have realized he had a problem when Magnum’s story kept changing. And for hiding exculpatory evidence, he should be disbarred. But I, for one, don’t pine for the “good old days,” when a woman had to be beaten within an inch of her life before a prosecutor “might” go forward with rape charges.
lc (1401be) — 6/16/2007 @ 3:04 pmDoes anyone really believe that NOTHING HAPPENED that night?
I think it’s clear that the alleged victim was not gang-raped that night. Was there any other behavior that could be regarded as assault or abuse?
What about the team-member who emailed another party boasting that he was going to “kill the nigger bitch” ?
Nifong fucked up and handled the entire situation incorrectly.
The idea that the lacrosse-team players were angels innocent of any crime, however, simply doesn’t square with reality.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 6/16/2007 @ 3:06 pmDo you know of any evidence that a crime occurred, LA, or is the fact that they’re nasty straight white males enough for you?
Pablo (99243e) — 6/16/2007 @ 3:24 pm#12 If you are so sure SOMETHING happened, what exactly is it you think happened? Any evidence, besides the discredited word of the alleged victim? IIRC, even the other stripper said nothing happened. Seems to me you are reaching, since you don’t seem to be looking for actual assault but any behaviour that you could CONSTRUE as assault.
Not My Problem (993176) — 6/16/2007 @ 3:30 pmYeh Liberal Avenger–they were guilty of misdemeanor stupidity. Mixing booze, calling for black pole dancers or whatever wasn’t smart–and I’m not willing to let them off with “Boys will be Boys”. Lie down with Pole Dancers and you might get up with lice/crabs–or at least a tattered reputation.
But if being guilty of misdemeanor stupidity were a convictable offense, half of your liberal friends would be in jail for what they say each day.
But misdemeanor stupidity is not a convictable offense, so life goes on.
I would suppose that there was at least one underage male (if not many such underage males) consuming malt beverages at the Duke Lacrosse team party that night, and so a crime was committed. A crafty North Carolina Alcohol Beverage Control agent could probably have slipped into the party and nabbed the little varmint(s).
The fact is that the more serious crimes/violations of ethics in this matter (and absolute departure from rationality) occurred in the Nifong prosecutorial suite–and on the faculty at Duke.
Fortunately for these “ratty little frat boys who MUST BE GUILTY OF SOMETHING”, the law and justice system, correctly applied, focuses on what the defendant DID rather than what someone thinks “he must have done”
Put another way, a state’s Penal Code should not give a flying flip for Political Correctness—you get charged for a violation of the PC Penal Code rather than for a violation of the Political Correctness code—or at least that’s the way it should go in the courthouses. Among the liberal literati and such, I guess the rules get reversed.
Mike Myers (2e43f5) — 6/16/2007 @ 3:34 pmLuckily your version of reality doesn’t count. But unfortunately too many people like you will always think that way. That’s why the Nifongs of this world need to be held accountable. It won’t give those boys back the lives they had before he ruined them, and it won’t make people like you stop believing what you want to believe, but maybe it will prevent the same injustice from happening again. Just maybe.
Not at all a fair comparison. We have gone so far in the other direction that accusing someone of rape is becoming so easy that the crime of rape has lost it’s meaning. And there are no consequences for any false accusation of rape even when it’s a blatant, provable, lie. It’s insane that a woman can cry rape because her date didn’t call her the next day. It’s insane when a woman can accuse a man of rape, be proved to be lying, and nothing happens to her at all.
I find it maddening that nobody holds this woman to any kind of standard for her own behavior at all. The men are still considered guilty of some “crime” that MAY have happened but she gets off scott free for lying. It’s unreal.
I don’t think the quote was about the Cianci case. I can’t remember. We’ve had a few notorious cases. Von Bulow maybe? Poor Buddy. I just read the other day that he got out. He was quite the character. I wouldn’t be surprised if he ran for mayor again. And won!
Lori (3f0b71) — 6/16/2007 @ 3:46 pmI can’t believe that these guys cannot sue this woman for her slanderous allegation! I really believe that all the perps of this lie are due at least civil penalties.
Paul from FL (ae01cb) — 6/16/2007 @ 4:10 pmOf course something happened. A group of lacrosse players hired two strippers, and one falsely accused two of them, plus a third who wasn’t even there, of rape. That’s what happened that night.
By her, certainly.
What about your crappy memory? Your butchered quote is a reference to an intemperate email a team member (not one of the three Mangum and Nifong attempted to railroad, BTW) sent to express his anger over the fact that Mangum falsely accused his teammates of rape. It’s no evidence at all of anything having happened on the night they paid Mangum to do nothing but drag them through the mud.
From the perspective of the “reality” based community, I suppose not.
Xrlq (ce194d) — 6/16/2007 @ 4:28 pmThanks Patt for reporting this item in your blog. I think it’s a very important issue, not so much the name Nifong, but it sheds light on a problem that varies in severity nationally.
This nation has some rogues running around in positions of power over others lives. They need to pay heed to what has just happened in NC and alter their own behavior as well. The sooner the better, there is now a very large group of eyes on folks from across the nation, they little left to do sans focus on more local matters and personalities. When one is located, the lights and heat lamps go on.
LA, One note of FACT for you.
Many people with direct access to the players, Crystal Mangum, the accuser, and in fact all of the personalities involved in this case, investigated it, a second time and found the boys INNOCENT!
They did not make vague statements about not enough evidence, shaky witnesses, lack of DNA, or even that “something must have happened” that night. They stated, on the record, the boys were INNOCENT!!!! BECAUSE they were INNOCENT all charges were dropped against them!
Hanging close to the blogs dedicated to the Duke case I’ll cast my vote to the AG’s office of NC and take their word about what happened or did not happen March 13, 2006.
You can continue to bang your pots and declare how the sky is falling. I’m sure you are an effective communicator and garner a massive following! 🙂
TC (b48fdd) — 6/16/2007 @ 5:25 pmYes LA the La Crosse players were guilty of being straight white males in a majority Black city with lots of Liberals at the University (who hate straight white males). Feminists, Black Nationalists, La Raza, whatever. They made it clear they wanted the players lynched no matter what the facts were.
THAT is why Nifong obstructed justice by withholding evidence that showed the players were not guilty, but were factually innocent of any crime.
“Something happened.” Yes indeed. Straight White Men were publicly lynched in a post-modern “high tech lynching” to quote Justice Thomas.
I wouldn’t have faulted Nifong with going forward with a case, but indicting after all the physical evidence showed there was no crime? Ha.
And the SANE nurse? Obviously agenda-driven (another Straight White Male hater). Since no crime occurred but Mangum’s perjury.
The Left has been making war, cultural and otherwise on their principal enemy, and this time it blew up in their face.
Jim Rockford (e09923) — 6/16/2007 @ 5:36 pmThis whole thing was a travesty. I won’t mention Patterico’s least favorite case by name, but I’m glad to see lately that the law seems to be catching people who usually seem above it.
David N. Scott (71e316) — 6/16/2007 @ 6:08 pmThe only reasons I can come up with as to why Nifong would commit to stepping down from his elected job are
a) to prevent getting disbarred (didn’t quite work)
and b) to avoid losing his pension (which I think he’ll still lose)
Glad the Three disbarred him, though really, it’s too bad.
How else will he pay for the civil suits these three boys will win against him (not to mention the county and the stripper)?
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 6/16/2007 @ 6:29 pmMethinks that the stripper/prostitute has an ironclad defense in her mental health history. Remember the “sealed medical records.” The police, and Nifong, have no such defense against a section 1938. The “special investigator” Wilson is another “winner” who is about to become a loser.
great unknown (fc7c50) — 6/16/2007 @ 7:07 pmI think it should all just be a wash. One bunch of morons, the students, consorted with a prostitute and got almost everything they deserved to get out of it. Another [words escape me], Mike Nifong, consorted with a prostitute and got almost all he deserved to get out of it. “Almost” because they avoided venereal disease.
Tough turkeys to all. It’s not like warnings to avoid prostitutes are some kind of new thing.
nk (0ebe4a) — 6/16/2007 @ 7:18 pmThis is a good step,now conviction and summary execution would be a good followup
narciso (fc7c50) — 6/16/2007 @ 7:24 pmNo. 24: I like the way you think, nk. I think they’re all a bunch of creeps.
lc (1401be) — 6/16/2007 @ 7:25 pmSorry NK,
Paul from FL (ae01cb) — 6/16/2007 @ 7:37 pmThe boys conducted a less than ideal, but legal transaction. They didn’t show much class in their choice of diversion and/or entertainement but did not commit a crime.
Magnum falsely accused and then proceeded to repeatly perjure herself.
Yes, they drank too much and got mouthy, again not a crime.
Nifong surpressed evidence (sorry, after all these years as a Member of the Bar, oops doesn’t cut it.)
So it’s not a wash. Magnum should suffer Civil suits and remedies. Might it chill all accusations in the future? Maybe. Might it drive women to make better career choices, I hope so but doubt it.
Sorry, she broke the law, the Lacrosse team didn’t.
And don’t even get me started on those 88 sanctimonius a**hats that are tenured facility at Duke.
Anyone heard from Irwin Chermerinsky lately?
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/16/2007 @ 8:49 pm[ bleep] Mike Nifong…
… and his equine transportation
Kevin R.C. O'Brien (ae83cd) — 6/16/2007 @ 9:01 pmNifong’s Legacy…
Lots of other folks are covering the downfall of Mike Nifong (D-NC), formerly the Durham DA and infamous for running with the allegation, in the face of objective lack of evidence, that one Crystal Mangum had been raped by members…
baldilocks (72c8fd) — 6/16/2007 @ 9:02 pmIn a more serious vein, you have to wonder how many times Nifong did this to somebody who didn’t have the resources — not just material, but cognitive — of the Duke students.
And you have to wonder how many times someone else has done it.
I’m not paranoid enough to think Mike Nifong is typical. I’ll readily believe that he’s a rare exception.
But I’m aware that our justice system is entirely staffed by human beings, with all the freight that bears.
You’d think if any case would unite left and right in this fragmented country, this one would. Guess not. Pity.
Kevin R.C. O'Brien (ae83cd) — 6/16/2007 @ 9:07 pmPaul from fl,
In your neat little list of who is guilty of what, you forget to mention “assault” in the “Duke Lacrosse Players” column. Telling a black woman to “thank your grandaddy for my cotton shirt” isn’t “getting mouthy”, it’s assault, and it’s possibly a hate crime.
Kevin R.C. O’Brien,
Don’t kid yourself about the “cognitive resources” of the Duke boys saving them from Nifong. Chalk it up to his incompetence/lack of ethics and their parents’ pocketbooks. These guys were morons.
nk,
I salute your pragmatism, and second your sentiments. Down with stupid people.
Leviticus (7eccde) — 6/16/2007 @ 9:25 pmAnd Mangum and the other (black) stripper allegedly had said something about “small-d**ked white boys” either originally or in response to that insult.
It seems as though a minor p**sing contest between white guys (who weren’t exactly into black women)and some black women turned into something more than it should have been. Nifong’s problem is that he turned minor, stupid stuff into something which he *thought* he could use to his own advantage.
As a professional, he was supposed to be better than he was. And that’s why he should fall and is falling.
baldilocks (815eff) — 6/16/2007 @ 10:05 pmTo correct the ‘crappy memory’ referred to in #18, the McFadyen e-mail played off a book assigned in at least three Duke courses, and the team had just watched the movie the night before.
It was nothing more than timely gallows humor derived from a very successful book and movie, expressed in a private e-mail that the Duke administration improperly allowed to be reviewed by outsiders.
But the media outlets breathlessly reporting the e-mail didn’t explain the context, and context is everything.
DianaM (4f4516) — 6/16/2007 @ 10:13 pmWasn’t one of the three Duke boys tried and convicted of beating up some gay guys at a bar?
A charge that would have been dropped if it weren’t for the Duke case?
alphie (015011) — 6/16/2007 @ 11:04 pmTelling a black woman to “thank your granddaddy for my cotton shirt” isn’t “getting mouthy”, it’s assault, and it’s possibly a hate crime.
*********
But of course it’s not assault or a hate crime for a black person to harangue White’s with the term honky, or white boy, or any such thing is it? Of course not, black on white crime CAN’T exist can it?
***********
The, “thanks to your grand father for the cotten shirt” is as well a well known Chris Rock skit. He is black in case you did not know.
*************
Ther continues to exist the very REAL possibility that the E-mail being bantered about could have come from a DPD person, they did have control of computers at the time it was sent.
I’ll add that I know folks that have the ability today of sending stuff from your computer that would appear valid, even though you had nothing in the world to do with it. It’s just computer science, not rocket science, though the latter may today be easier to fully understand.
Speaking of the DPD, Well I will say only that for any alleged crime to have occurred this bunch of wanna be cops phuked up as much as any department ever could have phuked up. I’m looking forward to the day some of them as well have an additional “unpaid” day in court!
************
It was just a bar altercation, sexual orientation was not an issue, happened…. at a different time and place, can’t remember time or place, but can send you to folks that know it by heart! Just so you as well will KNOW the truth!
**************************
It appears as well that for 28 years of service mike Nifong did indeed do just that, served the citizens of Durham. Many have spoken on his behalf to such. (Many not in any way associated with this case! That says something about the man. Too bad he decided to sell his soul while attempting to put three kids into prison over a NON crime…. Blows me away. I suppose it was but a crime of opportunity that he actually thought he could get away with, (this one time), make me a hero to the blacks and get elected to my rightful office!
Some of it worked.
********
The boys requested white dancers.
TC (b48fdd) — 6/17/2007 @ 12:25 amOn what planet, Leviticus? Unless my copy of Black’s is defective, assault is a threat to harm. What assault? What hate crime? What Lord of the Flies island do you live on?
Pablo (99243e) — 6/17/2007 @ 2:02 amgeez no wonder liberalism is dead by cultural Marxism…affluent white boys are always guilty of racism, homophobia, sexism, rape, bad jokes even when they don’t commit the crimes.
Some nasty stuff that collective groupthink.
susan (7faf4d) — 6/17/2007 @ 3:06 amI would like to point out that Liberal Avenger, Leviticus,and alphie are known child rapists who only get off due to their connections with facist democratic party prosecuters. The idea that these Nazis liberals were angels innocent of any crime, however, simply doesn’t square with reality.
Just tired of it (610904) — 6/17/2007 @ 4:42 amI recall the case of the family who did daycare and were accused of mass child molestation and were jailed for 2 years before it was found out that it was faulty interrogation techniques on the children and over zealous prosecuters. Never let the truth get in the way of their version of (perverted) perceived “justice”. BTW don’t jerks like Liberal Avenger just get under your skin. They can rant about the fascist right wing conservatives all they want but they are the real deal when it comes to hatred, bigotry and irrationality.
andy husser (b357fd) — 6/17/2007 @ 4:53 amOne of our founding mothers said, “I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” That is a liberal sentiment.
“What you say offends [X], and I will see you punished for it” is not a liberal sentiment, and cannot be made into one by any verbal gymnastics. “Liberal Avenger”, being adamantly opposed to any substantive application of the concept of “rule of law”, is not, in fact, a “liberal” of any sort.
There have been a couple of articles recently bemoaning the state of modern liberalism. They are mostly bullshit — backpatting self-congratulation about how the writer is not one of those people or diatribes that miss the point. The problem with liberalism today is that there aren’t any liberals in it; it’s just a team label. Nobody expects the Bengals to be furry, the Colts to wear saddles, or the Vikings to begin sacking towns. Nobody expects Liberal Avenger or his buddies to express liberal sentiments, either.
Regards,
Ric Locke (06eae5) — 6/17/2007 @ 5:55 amRic
The post by LA and a couple others above just show how resistant some can be when stuff that so neatly fits their agenda turns out not to be true.
The NC State AG previously and the Bar closer (Williamson?) yesterday expressly stated that their detailed and comprehensive reviews of the evidence proved that the three were INNOCENT of all charges. NOTHING happened!
As for the racist comment, the other Black dancer shouted a racist comment to the LAX folk and one of the young men retorted with one. It is that retort, and never the one by the other Black fem, that has gotten all the mention. Odd, is it not, that the racist comment by the Black that incited the retort by the White never seems to get mentioned in the MSM? Nor does it get mentioned that the White kid who made the retort was NOT one of the three who were charged, so those three did not do that either.
Nifong just took advantage of this perfect storm of an opportunity and so many others just saw it as the perfect opportunity as it so well fit their agendas.
Why don’t they who held so strongly for what they felt was a disadvantaged minority fem being abused by rich whites just admit that Nifong took advantage of their sincerity and sense of morality to further his own personal agenda? Why don’t they just blame that one bad guy, demand that he and his fellow conspirators be punished, and say that they – the liberal community or however they term themselves – were among the worst of Nifong’s victims? After all, he raped them in the ideological sense?
jim (b1ad3f) — 6/17/2007 @ 6:58 amPeople don’t offend with words, people get offended with words.
Nifong was rightly disbarred, Magnum will escape any punishment due to her mental state (maybe rightly so, I haven’t looked into that) and the lacrosse players will (one day) lead normal lives.
Mostly a win for the system. Mostly.
Lord Nazh (899dce) — 6/17/2007 @ 7:26 amI feel compelled to point out that all of the declarations of innocence are of the accused; I have seen no claims by those making those declarations that the alleged victim was guilty of intentionally making a false claim. My own guess, given what’s been revealed (illegally?) of her medical and psychological history, is that she was indeed raped, probably several years ago, and that something at the party triggered a “flashback” to that event, which she then reported as a current event. That doesn’t diminish Nifong’s guilt in the least, it adds her to the list of his victims, as the real crime committed against her that I imagine will never be believed (if it’s ever found.)
While it’s satisfying that Nifong will be disbarred, I fear that the real needs of the justice system will again be ignored. To name only one, that public defenders’ offices across the country are woefully underfunded is obvious; does anyone believe that there is any PD office in the country that could have brought about this result?
htom (412a17) — 6/17/2007 @ 7:34 amLook – I think that Nifong fucked up and earned himself his disbarring. I also think it’s clear that the accuser wasn’t “gang-raped” and effectively, no doubt with the encouragement of Nifong, “falsely accused” the players of such.
The idea that these young men were angels, however, simply isn’t realistic. You’ve got Nifong pegged as a monster and the accused as a scheming, lying bitch. Do you really think nothing happened that night?
If ANY of the guests at that party laid a hand on the accuser – regardless of her role as a stripper – then some sort of assault happened. Nobody grabbed a tit or an ass? I find that very hard to believe. If a single cock escaped from one of the players’ pants, even if it never made it near her vagina, then something was amiss. Is everyone here certain that everybody kept it in their pants that night?
Should any and all manner of sexual contact up to but excluding intercourse be allowed at drunken frat parties where strippers are paid to entertain? Is there not a set of behavior short of intercourse that all of us would find unacceptable?
It’s naive to think that none of this occurred, and it is cruel to simply dismiss the entire experience of the stripper out of hand – and pin the Tawana Brawley label on her.
I’m not asking for these kids to go to jail, nor am I seeking for Nifong to be unpunished. I am criticizing many of you here for what is most certainly a “the bitch got what she deserved” attitude.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:01 amNifong filled the original charges after he received the DNA report that showed no DNA from from any of the 46 team members but did show 10 other unknown and one known (the women’s boy friend) DNA. They stopped counting at that point and there were other probable unknowns which were not complete enough to indentify as a separate person.
The other dancer at that point had already denied anything happened at the party. And the accuser had failed two other photo lineups and had given up to 12 different stories about what happened with the number of attackers varying from 4 to 20.
At that point I think it’s hard to justify Nifongs actions.
The last judge involved with the case, Smith I believe has already signaled that he retains control over the case and has not meted out punishments for perjury and contempt for the actions of Nifong. His court is where the action is moving next week and many expect criminal contempt charges to come out of that. Apparently the first judge in case will also get a bite of Nifong’s hide later.
Civil suits against Nifong, the Durham PD, the City of Durham and Duke University are also expected. I think the bar assciation gave the players lawyers plenty of ammo to breech Nifong’s immunity. The accuser is essentially suit proof, probably has no assets.
Lastly at the post hearing news conference, the team’s lawyers said that it was just an accident that they discovered the DNA coverup. They were looking at the DNA evidence only in regard to the fingernail evidence when they discovered the 10+1 DNA sources.
agesilaus (9923ce) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:03 amI think you must have done it, LA.
Does anyone think he didn’t? I mean, really. This is a guy with a manshake fetish! Does anyone believe that he hasn’t been groping and exposing and generally being a degenerate criminal!?! Is anyone near certain that he hasn’t?
Let’s build a gallows and rid ourselves of this demon!
Pablo (99243e) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:08 amRic Locke,
As if on cue:
Sounds a bit like Pat Robertson, doesn’t he?
Pablo (99243e) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:17 amGroping the stripper is allowed at your parties, Pablo?
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:33 amWell LA does seem to have a groping problem/fetish.
Mike Myers (2e43f5) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:41 amThat would be up to the stripper, wouldn’t it, LA? Do you usually pull your crank out at your parties?
Pablo (99243e) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:42 amLiberal “Avenger,” WTF kind of evidence do you have that anybody groped the lying bitch/stripper? All you’ve got is the word of one hardened criminal, contradicted even by the other stripper. And yet you have the chutzpah to smear the boys because they … um … hired a stripper?!
Your logic ranks up there with Sideshow Bob attacking Mayor Quimby for being weak on crime because he pardoned Sideshow Bob.
Xrlq (ce194d) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:44 amYour logic ranks up there with Sideshow Bob attacking Mayor Quimby for being weak on crime because he pardoned Sideshow Bob.
Sideshow Bob’s logic was impeccable.
Serenity Now (b08c67) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:54 amOne conclusion is inarguable. The slime did get herself one white boy’s scalp. Nifong’s. All the other slimes that Nifong put away in his thirty-year career as a prosecutor should hang her picture up and light a candle in front of it every day.
nk (0ebe4a) — 6/17/2007 @ 9:08 amIt’s funny how an “alleged” terrorist could probably be found with anti-aircraft missiles, rocket launchers, 50 tons of explosives in his apartment along with all sorts of jihadist literature and a blueprint map detailing a Jewish community center or a federal courthouse, yet Liberal Avenger will claim there’s no evidence(!) of a “plan” to do something nefarious and that it’s all a misunderstanding (!) or a frame-up by neo-cons, Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News !
Yet in a case such as the Mike Nifong case where the NC AG has determined the boys are innocent, and there’s ZERO evidence, Liberal Avenger still takes the position that…they must have done something !
In Liberal Avenger’s psycho-sexual universe, handsome white college athletes who drink beers and look at a stripper are “evil,” while Arab Muslims who subscribe to Jihad Magazine have turned their apartments into a weapons arsenal and shrines devoted to Hitler are “misunderstood” !
I swear, unless your name happens to be Mike Nifong or Dan Rather—you can’t make this stuff up !
Desert Rat (de5a83) — 6/17/2007 @ 10:14 amA couple of things I’ve been thinking about since yesterday’s decision…
Greg Jefferies of Fox News brought this up yesterday – is the state AG for the DOJ going to look at the actions of the other members of the Durham DA’s office? I would find it hard to believe that nobody else in that office didn’t know what Nifong was doing.
Nifong’s replacement – should an outsider be brought in to take over, or will someone in the office or Nifong’s opponent in the election be selected to replace him?
Any word if the Duke Board of Trustees will be looking into the University’s actions during the last 15 months? Will they have the guts to look at their actions?
One other thing – I’ve read the comments of this thread about the actions of the team and of Mangum. I’m of this belief – that what happened that night, in the house on Buchanan during the party is something that all of the people involved will be dealing with for the rest of their lives. The actions of that night, and the months afterward, have tarnished reputations of the individuals, the DPD, DA’s Office and even the city of Durham and Duke University. Nothing will be the same again in Durham, NC
fmfnavydoc (affdec) — 6/17/2007 @ 10:21 amRe: htom
There’s a much simpler explanation: she’s drugged and boozed out of her mind when she got to the house. So much so that her performance bored her customer, and she stumbled out of the house. She first want to file charge against the other dancer, Roberts for stealing her $50 (one of the player actually try to find them to return the money). She was getting arrested for passing out drunk and on drug when she decided to get out of jail by claiming rape. It’s rather convenient and it’s something that she has done before.
BigFire (3f7b26) — 6/17/2007 @ 10:44 amSideshow Bob’s logic was impeccable.
He’s got a point, X.
Patterico (2a65a5) — 6/17/2007 @ 11:13 amLA-
Do you believe a person is innocent until proven guilty?
Wait, better, do you believe a person who has no criminal past should be presumed innocent when there is zero physical evidence that they are guilty and, furthermore, that the physical evidence proves that the alleged crime did not occur?
No, let me go further, how about if over and beyond the above, that the evidence gets reviewed a second time and still no guilt evidence is found, just additional evidence that the alleged crme did not occur?
Further still, how about if over and above all that I stated before, that it is proven that the prosecutor violated numer ous laws intended to assure justice, that the prosecutor lied, and that the prosecutor engaged in deceit?
Do you think then that the ones charged and all the others there about whom there is even less than zero evidence (no accusation, even) should be presumed innocent?
If you believe that, why don’t you just say that the system finally and belatedly worked ant that they are innocent?
Or do you have a scintilla of evidence where Nifong in all his struggles found none?
jim (b1ad3f) — 6/17/2007 @ 12:32 pmLiberal Avenger opines: “The idea that these young men were angels, however, simply isn’t realistic. You’ve got Nifong pegged as a monster and the accused as a scheming, lying bitch. Do you really think nothing happened that night?”
Yes, I think you raped your mother that night. Prove me wrong.
You are a disgrace to the concept of the classical liberal. People like you saw these young men as symbols of your anger at life and authority. You project your own fantasies on others. If you were there and the black strippers showed up, I suspect you would have been grabbing at them and trying for a “feel” if not more. You assume that others have no more self control than you do. Everything I have seen of these young men show me poise, intelligence and self control, qualities that you seem to lack.
I have also been told that the whole scenario is a familiar one in the world of private parties employing strippers. They arrive, perform for a couple of minutes and then demand more money to continue. If they are refused, they cry rape. They usually have a male “escort” who is there for protection and I wonder where their escort was that night. The boys were foolish to have the party and hire strippers. The rest is all in your sick mind. Nifong should go to jail for the same crime that Scooter Libby is facing three years for: obstructing justice.
Creep.
MIke K (d5c168) — 6/17/2007 @ 1:19 pmI find myself constantly taking a middle ground on the subject of college parties, probably because I have a son who is a college student. I would hit the roof if I learned my son attended parties like this, but I doubt he would because he’s seen how dangerous they can be. He has numerous friends that have been arrested for minor-in-possession and drug offenses and who spend countless hours each month in community service and alcohol/drug rehab programs. He knows “good kids” who overdosed or had DUI wrecks and barely survived, and one who didn’t survive. These frat-type parties may be commonplace but they are stupid.
However … that doesn’t mean the LAX students deserved false accusations of rape and assault, and it is unconscionable that the police and the DA’s office failed to adequately investigate the charges. Further, the DA took a weak case and deliberately turned it into a vendetta against white male college students for personal gain. That was despicable and for that Nifong deservedly lost his bar license.
Liberal Avenger, one of the virtues of liberalism is a heartfelt concern for personal liberties. It is disappointing that you are unconcerned about students who have clearly been wronged. Is it because these students don’t fit your profile of people we should feel sorry for? I think they are victims. Put yourself in their shoes and see if you would feel any different.
DRJ (2d5e62) — 6/17/2007 @ 1:39 pm“Liberal” Avenger, you use words very prettily. But controlling for educational level, your objection is identical to the sort of thing that would have been common in Southern courtrooms a generation ago: Hell, they’s niggahs, they’s bound t’be guilty of sump’m.
You’re not a liberal. You’re just a bigot with the polarity reversed. You should change your name to Billy Bob.
Regards,
Ric Locke (43a73d) — 6/17/2007 @ 1:57 pmRic
Stopped clock time. DRJ speaks for me 100 percent, although I don’t have a child in college just yet (not far off).
Let me add one other note. It is by no means unheard of for frat parties to hire a prostitute for group sex. An undergraduate acquaintance of mine, when I was in grad school, got in big trouble when it turned out that the woman[?] was 17 (i.e., under age in Calif.) and attended the local high school. The fact that she was black and the frat mostly Jewish didn’t help the PR problem. Worse, my own undergraduate alma mater had one such “party” where an drunk-and-unconscious woman student was gang-banged on video. I found the charges quite credible, but unlike Liberal Avenger, I soon realized this was Tawana Brawley redux, and it is indeed a “liberal” idea that we punish people for their acts, and not for some general reputation of athletes. The disbarment is compelled by the evidence. Criminal charges do not seem out of the question.
Andrew J. Lazarus (d52bb1) — 6/17/2007 @ 3:09 pmWhat color is their skin? LA is gonna need that bit of information.
Pablo (99243e) — 6/17/2007 @ 3:34 pmCoincidentally, I heard this on the radio this evening. Please give it a listen. It is a clip from the sports program “Only a Game”:
[Link]
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 6/17/2007 @ 5:42 pmRealAudio format.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 6/17/2007 @ 5:42 pmI find it funny that all LA’s talk is about what “might” have happened to that woman, first off she put herself in that situation it was her job and those boys were having fun and if you don’t like it to bad, it is no illegal to hire strippers for parties. I also would note we women hire male strippers as well for our parties, it’s a business and LA if you don’t like it change the laws otherwise stop your race hating of young white males and take a look at yourself and why you find these stripper parties so offensive, prude are you?
Jaded (c8d596) — 6/17/2007 @ 6:36 pmTelling a black woman to “thank your grandaddy for my cotton shirt” isn’t “getting mouthy”, it’s assault, and it’s possibly a hate crime.
A hate crime?! Is this where we are in America now? You have got to be kidding.
Harry Arthur (b318a5) — 6/17/2007 @ 6:40 pmMost vitally, I believe Mayor Quimby merely let Bob out on work furlough or somesuch. Am I mistaken?
Anyway, on the meat of the matter:
1. KC Johnson’s blog was sometimes biased, sometimes displaced from prosecutorial realities, and sometimes let his axe-grinding get in the way of the fact.
Still, in the end, he was right, he was right early, and he got more detail than anyone else. He deserves kudos.
2. I think it is abundantly clear that the Dukies were innocent. Straight-up innocent. I’m not big on the whole hiring-strippers thing, but that’s not a crime. The statements of the other stripper are consistent with no attack. There’s *no* *freaking* *way* charges should have been filed when the other stripper said it didn’t happen, and a cursory investigation would have resulted in plenty of info.
3. I thought Nifong would get fired and suspended but not disbarred. I am very pleased that Pat was right and I was wrong. Most interestingly, the mustard is off the hot dog – Nifong acknowledged that disbarment was appropriate.
4. I nominate Professor Coleman for Durham County DA. Academics as DA’s is not a recipe I think is a good idea generally, but Durham needs a guy who has shown the ability to be fair in difficult situations.
–JRM
JRM (539c63) — 6/17/2007 @ 8:54 pmso, if i tuck a $20 bill into a black stripper’s g-string, is that a hate crime?
assistant devil's advocate (41d666) — 6/17/2007 @ 9:28 pmAndrew J Lazarus #63:
I’m glad we agree on this subject but I can’t resist one question regarding your comment: Am I the stopped clock, are you, or have we entered the twilight zone?
DRJ (2d5e62) — 6/17/2007 @ 9:46 pmPatterico,
seePea (38fcb2) — 6/17/2007 @ 10:02 pmdo you have any comments on the DA who served prior to Nifong saying under oath that he did his best to refrain from handing over discovery ?
seePea,
I hadn’t heard about that, but that wouldn’t wash in California, where there is a regime of reciprocal discovery. And of course exculpatory information must be divulged immediately throughout the country.
Patterico (3fc6a1) — 6/17/2007 @ 10:18 pmLA’s really winning them over isn’t he?
That’s a whole lotta if there buddy…
What if you and your buddied raped your father? What if you killed, cooked, and ate your family dog? What if what if what if…
And ‘amiss’ and “illegal” aren’t the same thing LA. Just because it’s not right doesn’t actually make it worng. Bad taste? You bet (and a lil creepy for his buddies, if you ask me).
But if you’re a stripper for a college party, I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be the first time it happened, unless it was your first night on the job…
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 6/18/2007 @ 6:02 amdrj, we have entered the twilight zone
Andrew J. Lazarus (d52bb1) — 6/18/2007 @ 6:42 amTo Liberal Avenger the most important thing is the seriousness of the accusation – with or without evidence.
Where there is smoke there is fire … except this time the smoke was all coming out of the accuser’s a$$ and Nifong had his head so far up the electorate’s a$$ he couldn’t see the source.
quasimodo (edc74e) — 6/18/2007 @ 9:21 amNifong richly deserves whatever he gets. However he was just playing the media like a harmonica. Now the media are on the other side about 20 decibels less volume.
When WILL the media be held accountable for the effects of their honorable profession?
Jim Kurtz (6a3f11) — 6/18/2007 @ 9:50 amYou guys see everything in “black and white” (pardon the pun).
The lacrosse players were completely blameless angels who were taken advantage of by an evil, mentally ill negress and a scheming district attorney.
The accuser was poor and black and promiscuous and A STRIPPER, for god’s sake! What did she expect?
The real world that the rest of us live in exists in shades of grey.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 6/18/2007 @ 10:14 amNo LA, we don’t. We do, however, see things in terms of “innocent of every single charge” and “guilty”.
The stipper lied, several times, repeatedly changed her story, and one of her “attackers” wasn’t even THERE.
The “real world” you live in is, in fact, a land of maybe’s and fantasy, where these three boys would be in jail regardless of whether or not the actually touched her.
Because they MIGHT have.
Do you even listen to yourself talk, or do you just fade in and out?
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 6/18/2007 @ 10:18 amYou guys see everything in “black and white” (pardon the pun).
The lacrosse players were completely blameless angels who were taken advantage of by an evil, mentally ill negress and a scheming district attorney.
The accuser was poor and black and promiscuous and A STRIPPER, for god’s sake! What did she expect?
The real world that the rest of us live in exists in shades of grey.
No, you try to make everything more complex in order to justify your seeing everything through the scope of your politics and the narrative that you believe.
Nobody is claiming the lacross players are angels. They are simply people, like you and me. Hiring a stripper is legal. Getting in a verbal dispute and saying nasty things to the other party is legal. Drinking is legal if you are of age.
Those things may not be moral, these guys may have made bad decisions and/or done not so nice things.
But, that has nothing to do with anything. This is about the abuse of a prosecutor’s power in order to get relected, using the left’s narrative that everyone on the left willingly believed DESPITE the obvious evidence that came out right away disproving it. It’s about the rush to judgment and convict based on the fact that the alleged victim was a black woman and the alleged perpetrators were white boys of privilege. It is about how even now, despite how wrong you have been proven on every count, you cannot simply show regret or remorse for your rush to judgement and for ignoring the obvious (Nifong’s malfeasance). Instead, you rationalize your belief in the narrative by claiming that the lacrosse players must be guilty of something.
And you wonder why those of us on the right always point out that almost all tyrany in the last 100 years, and almost all mass murder etc., was perpetrated by the left and that the left is very, very scary. Even with all of the evidence, people like you still want to convict the lacrosse players and call them names, etc.
AFter all this time, have you no shame? Seriously? Have you now self awareness? What would it take for you to get a clue? There is nothing left for you to argue in this matter, you have been proven wrong every step of the way, yet you still hold to some delusional fantasy that the lacrosse players are still the ones in the wrong here. It is sad and pathetic.
Great Banana (aa0c92) — 6/18/2007 @ 11:04 amGB –
I have seen others in analagous situations where the facts turn out to conflict with how they WANTED it to be, how their ideology said it MUST be. What they often do then is to claim that there remains some doubt that what they wanted was the reality. They do not care how small such doubt might be, or even if there is any at all. They just want to leave with that as their exit line.
LA seems to be trying to do so here.
jim (a9ab88) — 6/18/2007 @ 11:31 amPablo,
You’re right – the “thank your grandaddy” remark wasn’t assault. I was talking out my ass, and forgot that Assault must be perceived as threatening by the individual in question. My mistake.
I feel fairly stupid right now, and will most likely wash my feet before I post on this blog again – since I don’t really like how they taste.
The verbal abuse was not assault.
This was. (right?)
“i plan on killing the bitches as soon as the walk in and proceeding to cut their skin off while cumming in my duke issue spandex”?
Wow… that’s pretty fucked up, isn’t it, Pablo? Especially since the time stamp (1:58 – right after the party, and the altercation) could indicate that the Duke Lacrosse player in question was pissed off, turned on, whatever… in the state of mind conducive to a crime of perverted passion, so to speak.
That’s assault, right? I defer…
And now you say, “Ha HA, but that’s Ryan McFayden, and he wasn’t even implicated by that detestable stripper!”
And then I say, “Look, I think it’s pretty obvious that no rape took place that night. The stripper was lying, and Nifong was trying to advance his career. But let’s not beat around the bush: there was some twisted stuff going on in these boys’ heads, and some of that stuff may have been translated from fantasy to reality. Let’s not make them out to be burgeoning stoics, repentant in the face of the follies of their youth… and let’s certainly not make them out to be saints.”
And then I say “Besides, I hate frat boys: spoiled little bastards, each and every one of them (except those Phi Beta Sigma chaps, of course)”.
I’m not sure what you say after that.
Leviticus (f63f81) — 6/18/2007 @ 3:16 pmThere is a point in there Leviticus?
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 6/18/2007 @ 4:29 pmYou guys see everything in “black and white” (pardon the pun).
The lacrosse players were completely blameless angels who were taken advantage of by an evil, mentally ill negress and a scheming district attorney.
The accuser was poor and black and promiscuous and A STRIPPER, for god’s sake! What did she expect?
Whether or not they were angels isn’t a question for a court of law, don’t you agree? Hiring a stripper isn’t illegal. Calling her names isn’t illegal (a hate crime? Bwahahahahaha). There was no credible accusation a crime was committed. I’m sorry if that doesn’t fit into your world view, LA, but the law has to deal with facts.
Eric (09e4ab) — 6/18/2007 @ 4:54 pmWell, no. It has to be directed at the intended victim of the harm. If I tell you that I’m going to castrate OJ Simpson, I didn’t assault him.
Maybe if you gave those feet a little while in some lemon pepper marinade it would help you get through the night a little more peaceably.
Aha! Thoughtcrime, Doubleplus ungood thoughtcrime.
You really should quit while you’re behind, Leviticus.
I say: “Of course you do, Leviticus. Of course you do.”
Pablo (99243e) — 6/18/2007 @ 5:06 pm$400+, if memory serves correctly.
What did she get?
Pablo (99243e) — 6/18/2007 @ 5:29 pmYou know what? Thank GOD these boys had money. Had they not, they would have ended up railroaded into either a conviction or a plea bargin.
The only reason Nifong has ended up where he is, is because these boys had the ability to fight the injustices.
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 6/18/2007 @ 6:09 pm“The real world that the rest of us live in exists in shades of grey.
Comment by The Liberal Avenger”
The real world shows us that leftists are sorely tempted by authoritarian methods. They know best and, if a few eggs get broken in making that ideal omelet, so what ? The most dangerous person in the world is a lefty who is sure he knows best. The only people in the world who are absolutely sure of their facts are paranoid psychotics. It’s a sad world when liberalism is represented by people like this budding tyrant.
MIke K (9b4b41) — 6/18/2007 @ 6:11 pmAny lefties arguing that the Duke boys should have been locked up without a trial, Mike?
Make room at Gitmo for ’em?
alphie (015011) — 6/18/2007 @ 6:28 pm87/Scott Jacobs:
It’s not always the money. It’s the desire to investigate.
There are cases (I swear!) where good public defender work makes a big difference. I’m a big fan of able, hard-working public defenders, and I hate incompetent or lazy defense attorneys of any stripe.
These guys could have gotten lousy paid attorneys, or similar people could have gotten good, unpaid PD’s. I’m not saying the money doesn’t help – the *big* money does, because you can seriously investigate the case. But this one *should* have been solved by any good attorney. It’s quite possible, even probable, that this thing would have melted down on Nifong even if his victims were, say, Dukies from poor neighborhoods on scholarship.
(I agree with your underlying sentiment that it would have been awful for these guys to have ended up imprisoned for years, of course.)
Three months from now, on Fox, I expect to have the Dukies all given Tasers and have Nifong in the chair. Nifong’s gonna need the money.
I got in a discussion on this at a poker table today. One guy dislked prosecutors, and that started this:
Disgruntled poker player: Prosecutors stick up for their own.
JRM: But every prosecutor I know wanted Nifong disbarred. And now, he can’t work anywhere!
Other poker player: KFC’s hiring.
So, from now on, it’s Mike “Would you like fries with that” Nifong. He deserves all of this. You do this job, you take certain responsibilities. Violate them and suffer.
–JRM
JRM (539c63) — 6/19/2007 @ 12:29 am[…] There is nothing left for you to argue in this matter, you have been proven wrong every step of the way, yet you still hold to some delusional fantasy that the lacrosse players are still the ones in the wrong here. … …Sportzia More […]
Duke Lacrosse Players Settle With School | lacrosse (da05be) — 6/19/2007 @ 4:40 amThe ada asked:
Depends: is it half the hate crime tucking a $10 bill would be, or twice te hate crime?
Dana (3e4784) — 6/19/2007 @ 5:33 amOur good friend the Liberal Avenger apparently thinks that some crime was committed, even though such was never proved.
But if we go to LA’s fine site, we’ll find an article by Gordo concerning Generalow Wilson, holding the position that Mr Wilson was inappropriately punished:
LA has yet to comment on this position on an article on his own site.
Perhaps he will later dispute Gordo’s position, and state that Mr Wilson should be incarcerated for those things prosecutors believe he did but did not prove.
Dana (3e4784) — 6/19/2007 @ 5:42 amWell, we have Malik Shabazz demanding that a guilty verdict be returned to the cheers of the crowd… Video
How about just clearing a little space around the burning cross for them?
Pablo (99243e) — 6/19/2007 @ 5:52 amLeviticus:
Nope, that wasn’t assault, either. It was a really nasty thing to write, but it was never communicated to the bitches in question, who were not even identified, so I fail to see how it could have placed any of them in apprehension of an imminent attack, even if it were a credible threat, which of course it was not. Nor, as you have already noted, was it uttered by any of the three individuals Nifong and Mangum tried to railroad, nor even the three they originally tried to railroad (i.e., the Adam, Brett and Matt referenced in the article you linked), thereby making this email wholly irrelevant to this discussion.
What are you going to say next, that some frat boys commit crimes, therefore all frat boys should be threatened with prosecution for crimes they did not commit? As Pablo suggested, it’s well past time for you to learn the first rule of digging.
Xrlq (1fd2ef) — 6/19/2007 @ 6:32 amrhydfbcam gzjtkn adfsehc qnhku rbmclnz pzmnjc exojai
vjhswnlzf uksrxpet (6c569a) — 7/8/2008 @ 8:08 pm