PDA

View Full Version : Accuser In Duke Rape Case (Allegedly) Gives Birth


lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 02:40 AM
According to the cousin of the accuser, who was on Fox News tonight, she gave birth within the last two days. Now if my math is correct, today is December 14; she claims she was raped on March 14.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Anyone who was in that lacrosse house better hope her baby is black.

Black Mamba.
Dec 15th, 2006, 02:41 AM
We all know those guys aren't going down but it's great to read one of your posts again Liz, it's been a long time.

lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 02:46 AM
We all know those guys aren't going down but it's great to read one of your posts again Liz, it's been a long time.


Maybe these three aren't but I was never convinced that at least someone in that house was as innocent as they were saying they were.

That you for the nice comment; I have been busy, plus since Vensu and Serena were not playing tennis since September, I didn't have a reason to come to the board.

Black Mamba.
Dec 15th, 2006, 02:57 AM
Maybe these three aren't but I was never convinced that at least someone in that house was as innocent as they were saying they were.

That you for the nice comment; I have been busy, plus since Vensu and Serena were not playing tennis since September, I didn't have a reason to come to the board.

I don't trust the culture at Duke( we all know where I'm getting at), but I didn't know you've been gone from here too. I left in August when I started law school and I just came back today.

lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 03:05 AM
I don't trust the culture at Duke( we all know where I'm getting at), but I didn't know you've been gone from here too. I left in August when I started law school and I just came back today.


Not only do I not trust the people at Duke, I have been very suspicious of the defense of all of the players. They have been hell bent on trashing this alleged victim and the way they have been going about it make me believe something happened in that house. It may not have been the three accused, but I think one of those lacrosse players did something to her.

Black Mamba.
Dec 15th, 2006, 03:15 AM
Not only do I not trust the people at Duke, I have been very suspicious of the defense of all of the players. They have been hell bent on trashing this alleged victim and the way they have been going about it make me believe something happened in that house. It may not have been the three accused, but I think one of those lacrosse players did something to her.

I totally agree, the double standard in how stuff like this is treated is sad. Look at the NYPD groom case with the cops trying to fabricate a 4th guy to justify 50 shots. I've yet to see a person in suburbs get capped 50 times.

lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 03:30 AM
I totally agree, the double standard in how stuff like this is treated is sad. Look at the NYPD groom case with the cops trying to fabricate a 4th guy to justify 50 shots. I've yet to see a person in suburbs get capped 50 times.


And you never will.

lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 01:53 PM
Updated: 08:06 AM EST

Reports Say Duke Rape Accuser Is Pregnant
By DAVID SCOTT, AP


RALEIGH, N.C. (Dec. 15) - The woman at the center of the Duke lacrosse rape case is pregnant and due to give birth any day (according to some reports, she gave birth yesterday), roughly nine months after the team party where she says she was raped by three men in a bathroom.

The pregnancy was confirmed late Thursday by a person familiar with the case, speaking to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity. Both Fox News and WRAL-TV in Raleigh reported she gave birth Thursday night.

There had been no prior indication the woman, a 28-year-old college student who already has children, was even pregnant. She has not spoken in public since granting a single interview to the News & Observer of Raleigh shortly after the party.

The person who confirmed the pregnancy to the AP had no information about the father. Defense attorneys have stressed for months that no sex occurred at the party and they have cited DNA testing that found genetic material from several males in the accuser's body and her underwear - but none from any member of the lacrosse team.

Calls to attorneys representing the three indicted players were not returned Thursday night, as were calls and messages left with District Attorney Mike Nifong.

Medical records included in a defense motion filed Thursday were not made public. It wasn't clear whether a pregnancy test was taken immediately after the party.

The development came just hours after defense attorneys file a motion saying the woman misidentified her alleged attackers in a photo lineup that was "an incoherent mass of contradiction and error." The attorneys asked a judge to bar prosecutors from using the photo lineup at their clients' trial and prevent the accuser from identifying the players from the witness stand.
Duke University law professor James E. Coleman Jr. said the case would be "effectively dismissed" if the court finds the lineup inadmissible "and rules that it is so suggestive that there can't be an in-court identification."
Within Thursday's motion, the defense highlighted what it considers numerous holes in the accuser's story.

Among the details cited are examples of how the accuser's story changed in the hours and days after the party; that she has a history of bipolar disorder; that she identified two people as having attended the party who were not there; and that she identified four attackers during the April photo lineup.

An earlier defense motion argued the lineup was "unnecessarily suggestive" because the accuser was shown only photos of lacrosse players.
Thursday's motion adds details about efforts by police investigators and Nifong to assist the accuser in identifying the three men she said gang-raped her in a bathroom at a March 13 team party where she had been hired to perform as a stripper.

Based in part on those identifications, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans were indicted on charges of rape, kidnapping and sexual offense. All three players have insisted they are innocent.

Investigators conducted three photo lineups, according to the defense motion. In the first two, the accuser failed to identify Evans and did not identify Seligmann as an attacker, despite being shown photos of both men.
Defense lawyers argue that the third lineup, conducted April 4 at the Durham Police Department, violated departmental policies and the defendants' constitutional due process rights because it included only pictures of those at the party.

A hearing is scheduled Friday, but it is unclear whether the defense might argue their motions filed Wednesday and Thursday. The hearing had been expected mostly to deal with scheduling.




12/15/06 00:34 EST

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press

*JR*
Dec 15th, 2006, 02:47 PM
According to the cousin of the accuser, who was on Fox News tonight, she gave birth within the last two days. Now if my math is correct, today is December 14; she claims she was raped on March 14.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Anyone who was in that lacrosse house better hope her baby is black.

9 months is the approximate length of human gestation, she could have gotten pregnant a few days B4 or after the 14th. And they can do DNA testing of course, not just look @ color. (After all, consensual sex for passion or for money with a different white guy can't be ruled out).

lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 03:42 PM
9 months is the approximate length of human gestation, she could have gotten pregnant a few days B4 or after the 14th. And they can do DNA testing of course, not just look @ color. (After all, consensual sex for passion or for money with a different white guy can't be ruled out).


Unless she has a history with white men (which I doubt) and considering where she lives, I'd rule it out.

*JR*
Dec 15th, 2006, 04:49 PM
Unless she has a history with white men (which I doubt) and considering where she lives, I'd rule it out.
Maybe she was also working as a call girl, and had sex with a white guy thru that, neither of us knows. And since (if she had a baby) the DA can get a DNA test done re. the lacrosse players, why don't we wait and see B4 rushing to judgement?

lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 04:59 PM
Maybe she was also working as a call girl, and had sex with a white guy thru that, neither of us knows. And since (if she had a baby) the DA can get a DNA test done re. the lacrosse players, why don't we wait and see B4 rushing to judgement?


The fact is no one knows, but I find this interesting: if the defense is so sure that none of their clients could be the father, then why are they asking for paterrnity tests? If I knew for sure my client's DNA was not found on the accuser, I wouldn't be worried about a paternity test.

Mother_Marjorie
Dec 15th, 2006, 05:22 PM
The fact is no one knows, but I find this interesting: if the defense is so sure that none of their clients could be the father, then why are they asking for paterrnity tests? If I knew for sure my client's DNA was not found on the accuser, I wouldn't be worried about a paternity test.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/story?id=1958031&page=1

Duke Lacrosse DNA: Mystery Man Revealed Accuser's Boyfriend is 'Single Source' of DNA on Vaginal Swab

Joe Cheshire, a defense attorney for Duke University lacrosse players at the center of a rape investigation, said the latest tests show no conclusive match to any of the lacrosse players' DNA. (ABC News)

By CHRIS CUOMO, GERRY WAGSCHAL, CHRIS FRANCESCANI and LARA SETRAKIAN

May 13, 2006 — The second round of DNA test results in the Duke University rape investigation show "no conclusive match'' to any lacrosse players, defense attorneys said, but a vaginal swab of the alleged rape victim produced DNA from a "single male source'' — a man not on the lacrosse team who did not attend a March 13 party that was the site of the alleged rape.

Defense attorney Joe Cheshire declined to identify the mystery man or his connection to the alleged victim, but ABC News' Law and Justice Unit has learned that the unnamed source of the DNA is the alleged victim's "boyfriend," according to her mother. ABC News is withholding the name of the man because he is apparently not a target of the investigation. Records indicate that Durham, N.C., police gave the "boyfriend'' a cheek swab to collect DNA on May 3, ABC News' Law and Justice Unit has learned exclusively.

It is unclear if or how the first DNA tests missed what appears to be the only foreign genetic material found on the alleged victim's body, defense attorneys said. Two Duke lacrosse players were indicted more than two weeks before the cheek swab was taken from the "boyfriend."

It is also unclear whether the alleged victim had sex with the "boyfriend" the night she claims to have been raped by three Duke lacrosse players. DNA experts tell ABC News that genetic traces of semen can remain in the body up to six days after intercouse.

Defense attorneys declined to release the actual report, saying that it contained the name of the "single male source.''

Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong did not return a call to his home Friday night requesting his reaction to the defense attorneys' press conference. Nifong has said recently that he would be undeterred by a lack of conclusive DNA evidence.

Experts say that the absence of conclusive DNA evidence would not necessarily be a fatal blow to the prosecution's case. They cite a figure stating that 75 percent to 80 percent of rape prosecutions do not involve forensic evidence such as DNA.

lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 06:29 PM
Now the DA is saying that the accuser is due to give birth in February.

At this point, I don't know who to believe. And it looks like Fox News was duped into reporting a false story.

gentenaire
Dec 15th, 2006, 06:41 PM
The fact is no one knows, but I find this interesting: if the defense is so sure that none of their clients could be the father, then why are they asking for paterrnity tests? If I knew for sure my client's DNA was not found on the accuser, I wouldn't be worried about a paternity test.

If they were worried about a paternity test, they wouldn't be asking for it, now would they? A negative paternity test can clear their name.

RVD
Dec 15th, 2006, 07:13 PM
On a lighter note, I hope that she's able to sell the TV or movie rights to this whole ordeal, because chances are she'll not see a dime from any one of the accused or another Lacrosse player (IF one of them is the daddy).
Strangely enough, the pregnancy matching perfectly with the rape, HAS to be unnerving for both the Defense attorneys and the accused. :scared:

And on a more painful note...
It would be exceedingly unfortunate for the child if it was conceived through a gang rape and grew up knowing that daddy was the only "one" of the many to be convicted because of ‘his’ birth.

...again, "IF" one of the Lacrosse members turns out to be the daddy.

What a strange, sad, and pathetic story. :(

le bon vivant
Dec 15th, 2006, 07:20 PM
According to the cousin of the accuser, who was on Fox News tonight, she gave birth within the last two days. Now if my math is correct, today is December 14; she claims she was raped on March 14.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Anyone who was in that lacrosse house better hope her baby is black.

No, I think she better be hoping her baby is mixed if she wants to help her case.

Helen Lawson
Dec 15th, 2006, 07:22 PM
I thought they dropped this case after the election was over.

samsung101
Dec 15th, 2006, 07:26 PM
The lacrosse team may be a bunch of rich, spoiled brat, yuppie
guys...and they may have a bad history at the school for
rough and weird behavior. Probably easy guys to dislike for
most people. But, the entire team got wrapped up in the news
media, hysterical cable tv coverage, and most were not involved
in any way.

Worst of all it may be innocent guys are being railroaded, and how
do they get their innocence back? Where do they go to get their
reputations back?

They can't.


But, the facts all seem to point to this woman making this thing
up, or at the very least, blowing out of proportion something that
may have been uncomfortable, yet not illegal.

The DA should never have allowed this to be tried in the news
media, and not in a court room. He not only did, he encouraged it.

The entire matter should have been taken care of by now, and yet
the DA has allowed it go on and on, and get re-elected w/the hype.


I'm sure this woman has major issues, but so what?

lizchris
Dec 15th, 2006, 07:30 PM
If they were worried about a paternity test, they wouldn't be asking for it, now would they? A negative paternity test can clear their name.


But if they say their DNA isn't on the accuser, then why would they want a DNA test to prove whether or not they fathered her child? Why worry?

cheesestix
Dec 15th, 2006, 08:11 PM
But if they say their DNA isn't on the accuser, then why would they want a DNA test to prove whether or not they fathered her child?

Because it would prove conclusively (one way or another) who the father is (or isn't). :rolleyes: Anything else is just speculation.

Why worry?

If they were worried, then wouldn't you expect them to resist a paternity test? :rolleyes:

Why is this so hard to understand? :confused:

RVD
Dec 15th, 2006, 08:40 PM
The lacrosse team may be a bunch of rich, spoiled brat, yuppie
guys...and they may have a bad history at the school for
rough and weird behavior. Probably easy guys to dislike for
most people. But, the entire team got wrapped up in the news
media, hysterical cable tv coverage, and most were not involved
in any way.

Worst of all it may be innocent guys are being railroaded, and how
do they get their innocence back? Where do they go to get their
reputations back?

They can't.


But, the facts all seem to point to this woman making this thing
up, or at the very least, blowing out of proportion something that
may have been uncomfortable, yet not illegal.

The DA should never have allowed this to be tried in the news
media, and not in a court room. He not only did, he encouraged it.

The entire matter should have been taken care of by now, and yet
the DA has allowed it go on and on, and get re-elected w/the hype.


I'm sure this woman has major issues, but so what?You conveniently forgot to mention that she began acting "odd" after she drank a cup of something handed to her. Which would account for her not recalling accurately. But here's the thing...
Regardless of what we speculate, if the child's DNA matches up with a Lacrosse player, then the case is at least partly resolved [for one of those responsible]. If not, then it still doesn't necessarily exonerate any of the other players involved or accused. :shrug:

cheesestix
Dec 15th, 2006, 08:54 PM
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/521773.html

Head of DNA lab says he and Nifong agreed not to report results

By Joseph Neff, Benjamin Niolet and Anne Blythe, Staff writers

The head of a private DNA laboratory said under oath today that he and District Attorney Mike Nifong agreed not to report DNA results favorable to Duke lacrosse players charged with rape.

Brian Meehan, director of DNA Security of Burlington, said his lab found DNA from unidentified men in the underwear, pubic hair and rectum of the woman who said she was gang-raped at a lacrosse party in March. Nurses at Duke Hospital collected the samples a few hours after the alleged assault. Meehan said the DNA did not come from Reade Seligmann, David Evans, or Collin Finnerty, who have been charged with rape and sexual assault in the case.

Meehan struggled to say why he didn’t include the favorable evidence in a report dated May 12, almost a month after Seligmann and Finnerty had been indicted. He cited concerns about the privacy of the lacrosse players, his discussions at several meetings with Nifong, and the fact that he didn’t know whose DNA it was.

Under questioning by Jim Cooney, a defense attorney for Seligmann, Meehan admitted that his report violated his laboratory’s standards by not reporting results of all tests.

Did Nifong and his investigators know the results of all the DNA tests? Cooney asked.

“I believe so,” Meehan said.

“Did they know the test results excluded Reade Seligmann?” Cooney asked.

“I believe so,” Meehan said.

Was the failure to report these results the intentional decision of you and the district attorney? Cooney asked.

“Yes,” Meehan replied.

At that answer, several people in the packed courtroom clapped. Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III warned the standing-room only crowd to be quiet or leave.

Meehan’s testimony differed from a statement Nifong made at the beginning of today’s hearing.

“The first I had heard of this particular situation was when I was served with this particular motion” on Wednesday, Nifong told the judge. After court, Nifong clarified his remarks to say that he knew about the DNA results.

"And we were trying to, just as Dr. Meehan said, trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud but at the same time his report made it clear that all the information was available if they wanted it and they have every word of it,” Nifong said.

Joseph B. Cheshire V, a lawyer for Evans, said he was troubled by today’s testimony.

“If any of the lacrosse players were excluded, they simply wouldn’t put it in the report,” he said. “It raises some troublesome questions about (Nifong), who has an obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence and turn it over to the defense.”

In a response to reports that the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case gave birth recently, UNC Health care issued a statement at about 1:30 p.m. saying that the woman is at UNC Hospitals for care related to her pregnancy but has not given birth.

RVD
Dec 15th, 2006, 09:04 PM
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/521773.html

Head of DNA lab says he and Nifong agreed not to report results

By Joseph Neff, Benjamin Niolet and Anne Blythe, Staff writers

The head of a private DNA laboratory said under oath today that he and District Attorney Mike Nifong agreed not to report DNA results favorable to Duke lacrosse players charged with rape.

Brian Meehan, director of DNA Security of Burlington, said his lab found DNA from unidentified men in the underwear, pubic hair and rectum of the woman who said she was gang-raped at a lacrosse party in March. Nurses at Duke Hospital collected the samples a few hours after the alleged assault. Meehan said the DNA did not come from Reade Seligmann, David Evans, or Collin Finnerty, who have been charged with rape and sexual assault in the case.

Meehan struggled to say why he didn’t include the favorable evidence in a report dated May 12, almost a month after Seligmann and Finnerty had been indicted. He cited concerns about the privacy of the lacrosse players, his discussions at several meetings with Nifong, and the fact that he didn’t know whose DNA it was.

Under questioning by Jim Cooney, a defense attorney for Seligmann, Meehan admitted that his report violated his laboratory’s standards by not reporting results of all tests.

Did Nifong and his investigators know the results of all the DNA tests? Cooney asked.

“I believe so,” Meehan said.

“Did they know the test results excluded Reade Seligmann?” Cooney asked.

“I believe so,” Meehan said.

Was the failure to report these results the intentional decision of you and the district attorney? Cooney asked.

“Yes,” Meehan replied.

At that answer, several people in the packed courtroom clapped. Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III warned the standing-room only crowd to be quiet or leave.

Meehan’s testimony differed from a statement Nifong made at the beginning of today’s hearing.

“The first I had heard of this particular situation was when I was served with this particular motion” on Wednesday, Nifong told the judge. After court, Nifong clarified his remarks to say that he knew about the DNA results.

"And we were trying to, just as Dr. Meehan said, trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud but at the same time his report made it clear that all the information was available if they wanted it and they have every word of it,” Nifong said.

Joseph B. Cheshire V, a lawyer for Evans, said he was troubled by today’s testimony.

“If any of the lacrosse players were excluded, they simply wouldn’t put it in the report,” he said. “It raises some troublesome questions about (Nifong), who has an obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence and turn it over to the defense.”

In a response to reports that the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case gave birth recently, UNC Health care issued a statement at about 1:30 p.m. saying that the woman is at UNC Hospitals for care related to her pregnancy but has not given birth.Are you convinced [or trying to convince others] that no one on the Lacrosse team is guilty of rape?
This is just a straight-forward question, so don't bent all out of shape. Just wondering why you chose to submit the above article, is all.

cheesestix
Dec 15th, 2006, 09:22 PM
Are you convinced [or trying to convince others] that no one on the Lacrosse team is guilty of rape?
This is just a straight-forward question, so don't bent all out of shape. Just wondering why you chose to submit the above article, is all.

I posted the article because: 1) it's factual, not opinion, 2) it is relevant to the discussion, and 3) it is current (released today).

Again, it's a factual article. Just because the facts of the article seem to favor the defendants, you make the assumption that I'm convinced that the whole team is innocent? :confused: (That's odd, because the article only mentions the 3 defendants.)

So, simplified, the answer is no.

On the other hand, are you convinced that someone on the lacrosse team is guilty? From reading your posts, it sure sounds like it.

darrinbaker00
Dec 16th, 2006, 12:16 AM
But if they say their DNA isn't on the accuser, then why would they want a DNA test to prove whether or not they fathered her child? Why worry?
Saying you're not the father is one thing; having concrete proof to that effect, as in a DNA test, is another. The latter carries infinitely more weight with a jury than the former.

drake3781
Dec 16th, 2006, 01:06 AM
Because it would prove conclusively (one way or another) who the father is (or isn't). :rolleyes: Anything else is just speculation.



If they were worried, then wouldn't you expect them to resist a paternity test? :rolleyes:

Why is this so hard to understand? :confused:


Haha, I fully agree with Cheesestix, eyerolls and questionmarks and all :lol:

(At least for this once, anyway.)

RVD
Dec 16th, 2006, 01:10 AM
I posted the article because: 1) it's factual, not opinion, 2) it is relevant to the discussion, and 3) it is current (released today).

Again, it's a factual article. Just because the facts of the article seem to favor the defendants, you make the assumption that I'm convinced that the whole team is innocent? :confused: (That's odd, because the article only mentions the 3 defendants.)

So, simplified, the answer is no.

On the other hand, are you convinced that someone on the lacrosse team is guilty? From reading your posts, it sure sounds like it.What will it take for you to calm the f**k down?! Oh well, I will just answer you in kind. :shrug:

An article is only factual as long as the data it is based upon is not proven false [as in whether evidence has not been tapered with or contaminated]. And ‘no’, I am not at this time suggesting either. But neither has this case gone to court. That alone should counter your feeble explanations for 1) and 2). And why would you bring up a non-issue with your "3)"? Did I say that the article wasn't current, or contend as much?
You are quite full of yourself it seems. And I'm not bored enough to get into it with you. So please don't bother replying to my post.

Mother_Marjorie
Dec 16th, 2006, 01:26 AM
The lacrosse team may be a bunch of rich, spoiled brat, yuppie
guys...and they may have a bad history at the school for
rough and weird behavior. Probably easy guys to dislike for
most people. But, the entire team got wrapped up in the news
media, hysterical cable tv coverage, and most were not involved
in any way.

Worst of all it may be innocent guys are being railroaded, and how
do they get their innocence back? Where do they go to get their
reputations back?

They can't.


But, the facts all seem to point to this woman making this thing
up, or at the very least, blowing out of proportion something that
may have been uncomfortable, yet not illegal.

The DA should never have allowed this to be tried in the news
media, and not in a court room. He not only did, he encouraged it.

The entire matter should have been taken care of by now, and yet
the DA has allowed it go on and on, and get re-elected w/the hype.


I'm sure this woman has major issues, but so what?

Well, the mere fact that the prosecution went to great lengths to suppress DNA evidence makes me believe that the case never had legs to begin with. Couple that with an "untimely" pregnancy and a "secret boyfriend" makes me believe that the girl made up the entire story because she was pissed about racially-inappropriate statements made at the party.

Even the accusers best friend that was present at and after the party has come forward to say that she witnessed the accuser attempting to put bruises on herself, and was asked to help her do it.

In my eyes, its Twana Brawley all over.

The girl needs help, and its not from prosecutors.

And its just my opinion.

cheesestix
Dec 16th, 2006, 01:31 AM
What will it take for you to calm the f**k down?!

What's not calm about my post? :rolleyes: I thought it was rather cordial and to the point. :confused:

As for the rest, you asked why I posted the article. I told you why. I owe you no explanations, yet you call my response feeble (as if I have to prove the article's worthiness :rolleyes: ). Whatever. :rolleyes:

And as far as the full of myself comment goes....that's funny coming from you.

lizchris
Dec 16th, 2006, 02:35 AM
Because it would prove conclusively (one way or another) who the father is (or isn't). :rolleyes: Anything else is just speculation.



If they were worried, then wouldn't you expect them to resist a paternity test? :rolleyes:

Why is this so hard to understand? :confused:


It isn't hard to understand, but as I stated before, their lawyers keep saying that they didn't have any sexual contact with this woman. If the DNA says this, then common sense would tell you that none of them is the father of this child and there is no need for a DNA test. In additon, if the child is due in February, then she got pregnant in May, two months after alleged rape.

Mother_Marjorie
Dec 16th, 2006, 03:00 AM
It isn't hard to understand, but as I stated before, their lawyers keep saying that they didn't have any sexual contact with this woman. If the DNA says this, then common sense would tell you that none of them is the father of this child and there is no need for a DNA test. In additon, if the child is due in February, then she got pregnant in May, two months after alleged rape.
She didn't wait long. I mean, it would seem to me that an umarried woman that was brutally raped, wouldn't psychologically be open for sex for a very long while. Being able to trust ANY man sexually would take a lot of therapy and a lot of time to heal.

That is, if a rape ever occured in the first place.

darrinbaker00
Dec 16th, 2006, 04:23 AM
Haha, I fully agree with Cheesestix, eyerolls and questionmarks and all :lol:

(At least for this once, anyway.)
Don't you ever, EVER, do that again. EVER. :armed:

Mother_Marjorie
Dec 16th, 2006, 06:09 AM
Published: Dec 15, 2006 09:56 AM
Modified: Dec 15, 2006 02:07 PM


Head of DNA lab says he and Nifong agreed not to report results


By Joseph Neff, Benjamin Niolet and Anne Blythe, Staff writers

The head of a private DNA laboratory said under oath today that he and District Attorney Mike Nifong agreed not to report DNA results favorable to Duke lacrosse players charged with rape.

Brian Meehan, director of DNA Security of Burlington, said his lab found DNA from unidentified men in the underwear, pubic hair and rectum of the woman who said she was gang-raped at a lacrosse party in March. Nurses at Duke Hospital collected the samples a few hours after the alleged assault. Meehan said the DNA did not come from Reade Seligmann, David Evans, or Collin Finnerty, who have been charged with rape and sexual assault in the case.

Meehan struggled to say why he didn’t include the favorable evidence in a report dated May 12, almost a month after Seligmann and Finnerty had been indicted. He cited concerns about the privacy of the lacrosse players, his discussions at several meetings with Nifong, and the fact that he didn’t know whose DNA it was.

Under questioning by Jim Cooney, a defense attorney for Seligmann, Meehan admitted that his report violated his laboratory’s standards by not reporting results of all tests.

Did Nifong and his investigators know the results of all the DNA tests? Cooney asked.

“I believe so,” Meehan said.

“Did they know the test results excluded Reade Seligmann?” Cooney asked.

“I believe so,” Meehan said.

Was the failure to report these results the intentional decision of you and the district attorney? Cooney asked.

“Yes,” Meehan replied.

At that answer, several people in the packed courtroom clapped. Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III warned the standing-room only crowd to be quiet or leave.

Meehan’s testimony differed from a statement Nifong made at the beginning of today’s hearing.

“The first I had heard of this particular situation was when I was served with this particular motion” on Wednesday, Nifong told the judge. After court, Nifong clarified his remarks to say that he knew about the DNA results.

"And we were trying to, just as Dr. Meehan said, trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud but at the same time his report made it clear that all the information was available if they wanted it and they have every word of it,” Nifong said.

Joseph B. Cheshire V, a lawyer for Evans, said he was troubled by today’s testimony.

“If any of the lacrosse players were excluded, they simply wouldn’t put it in the report,” he said. “It raises some troublesome questions about (Nifong), who has an obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence and turn it over to the defense.”

In a response to reports that the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case gave birth recently, UNC Health care issued a statement at about 1:30 p.m. saying that the woman is at UNC Hospitals for care related to her pregnancy but has not given birth.

cheesestix
Dec 16th, 2006, 09:57 AM
Published: Dec 15, 2006 09:56 AM
Modified: Dec 15, 2006 02:07 PM


Head of DNA lab says he and Nifong agreed not to report results


By Joseph Neff, Benjamin Niolet and Anne Blythe, Staff writers

.....



Hmmm, where have I seen this article before? :scratch:

Oh, I know, I posted it in this thread already (see post #23). :rolleyes:

*JR*
Dec 16th, 2006, 06:34 PM
December 15, 2006
The damage to Duke starts to show
Richard Baehr (http://americanthinker.com)

Duke University's handling of the alleged rape attack by three members of its lacrosse team last year, along with the exposure of town-gown antagonisms and other negative publicity seems to have caused measurable damage to the school. The results are just starting to come in, but the school could be in for long term slippage, following its dramatic climb to the upper level of the academic prestige system.

Duke University likes to think of itself as the Harvard of the South. (Harvard, on the other hand, has never spent any time wondering whether it was the Duke of New England.) Admissions statistics are one of the key determinants of the pecking order among universities of the first rank.

Duke's statistics on early decision applications for the class of 2011 are now in. While applications are growing at most of Duke's "overlap" schools (those with which it competes for top students each year), early decision applications to Duke dropped 20% from last year. Duke admitted approximately 40% of those in the early decision pool, more than double the overall acceptance rate for last year‘s entering class.

There is one key reason while competitive universities prefer early decision applicants: admitting lots of early decision applicants increases a school's "yield" (the percentage of those the school accepts, who then accept the school's offer. One hundred percent of early decision admits enroll, driving yield for the entire admitted group much higher. A high percentage of early decision admits can mask a low yield on the part of the rest of those accepted. Comparative yield statistics figure prominently in many competitive rankings of universities.

Duke has always fared poorly against the Ivy League schools and other elite institutions such as MIT and Stanford in the head to head competition when students receive more than one acceptance. It needs a high proportion of early decision admits to mask this weakness. This year, it will be no surprise if Duke fares even worse in this competition than in other years, after the complete admission results are reported in the spring.

Duke is a prestige school with many quality sports programs (like Stanford and Princeton), with very strong "programs" (to use the vernacular) in men's and women's basketball, soccer and lacrosse to name just a few. Given how shabbily the University treated the lacrosse team members after the initial accusations were made (with about a hundred faculty members all but demanding that the team members be strung up for their "crimes" of rape and racism, and the President of the University seeming to forget that even white athletes are innocent until proven guilty), it is not surprising that some of America's best students and athletes may be thinking twice about whether Duke offers the kind of atmosphere they seek.

For the three accused lacrosse players, almost certainly innocent of the charges filed against them, their names have been tarnished forever, even if they are eventually cleared of the charges. Their families have had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawyers to defend their sons. Lives have been harmed forever.

But District Attorney Nifong cruised to re-election in heavily black Durham. Like Captain Ahab, Mike Nifong will not let facts get in the way of a crusade, which may be casting both the white devils, and the Blue Devils, overboard.

meyerpl
Dec 16th, 2006, 06:45 PM
On on hand, in this case there are people rushing to judge the accused guilty of the crime in the absence of DNA evidence. On the other, some people continue to insist that O.J. is innocent in the face of DNA evidence to the contrary.
This is a curious contradiction. Is it because people distrust DNA evidence? Or, is it because people distrust the experts interpreting the evidence and testifying?
One thing people seem to forget; nobody charged with a crime needs to prove their innocence, the prosecution has to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Sex crimes are often very difficult to prove.
People here have aptly pointed out that DNA can prove guilt, but certainly can't prove innocence. True, but innocence need not be proven.

darrinbaker00
Dec 16th, 2006, 06:55 PM
Hmmm, where have I seen this article before? :scratch:

Oh, I know, I posted it in this thread already (see post #23). :rolleyes:
So what if you did?

venus_rulez
Dec 16th, 2006, 07:06 PM
On on hand, in this case there are people rushing to judge the accused guilty of the crime in the absence of DNA evidence. On the other, some people continue to insist that O.J. is innocent in the face of DNA evidence to the contrary.
This is a curious contradiction. Is it because people distrust DNA evidence? Or, is it because people distrust the experts interpreting the evidence and testifying?
One thing people seem to forget; nobody charged with a crime needs to prove their innocence, the prosecution has to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Sex crimes are often very difficult to prove.
People here have aptly pointed out that DNA can prove guilt, but certainly can't prove innocence. True, but innocence need not be proven.


By far the best and most rationale post in this entire thread :worship:

SelesFan70
Dec 19th, 2006, 06:07 AM
On a lighter note, I hope that she's able to sell the TV or movie rights to this whole ordeal, because chances are she'll not see a dime from any one of the accused or another Lacrosse player (IF one of them is the daddy).
Strangely enough, the pregnancy matching perfectly with the rape, HAS to be unnerving for both the Defense attorneys and the accused. :scared:

And on a more painful note...
It would be exceedingly unfortunate for the child if it was conceived through a gang rape and grew up knowing that daddy was the only "one" of the many to be convicted because of ‘his’ birth.

...again, "IF" one of the Lacrosse members turns out to be the daddy.

What a strange, sad, and pathetic story. :(

Crystal Gail Mangum is a liar. Mike Nifong is a liar. There was no rape at 611 Buchanan Street in Durham, NC that night. Nifong used her to get elected, and it worked. :o

She's also up in UNC hospital in Chapel Hill, NC for pre-natal care...she's not in hiding as her family claims. I know this because I have friends that work there. :wavey: So don't believe anything that "cousin Jakki" says. He's a well-known drag queen to us fags in this area. His real name is Clyde Young, but he goes by Jakki O'Night (http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/page?oid=35723) while in drag!. :tape: It's pretty funny that he got Greta/FoxNews and the local powerhouse affiliate WRAL to say Crytal had already given birth, though. Good one! :yeah:

Mother_Marjorie
Dec 19th, 2006, 06:15 AM
Crystal Gail Mangum is a liar. Mike Nifong is a liar. There was no rape at 611 Buchanan Street in Durham, NC that night. Nifong used her to get elected, and it worked. :o

She's also up in UNC hospital in Chapel Hill, NC for pre-natal care...she's not in hiding as her family claims. I know this because I have friends that work there. :wavey: So don't believe anything that "cousin Jakki" says. He's a well-known drag queen to us fags in this area. His real name is Clyde Young, but he goes by Jakki O'Night (http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/page?oid=35723) while in drag!. :tape: It's pretty funny that he got Greta/FoxNews and the local powerhouse affiliate WRAL to say Crytal had already given birth, though. Good one! :yeah:

Yep. Twana Brawley all over again. And the sad part is, it will follow her the rest of her life, unless she changes her name like Twana had to do.