Idiot.
I cannot believe that anyone with three or more functioning brain cells could say this with a straight face. IMHO the 4 dumbest things in the entire world are:
- A bag of hair
- A box of rocks
- People who don’t have a problem with how Nifong instructed the police to conduct the photo array.
- The OJ jury
For crying out loud, the police (acting on Nifong’s orders) only showed the LW pictures of the lacrosse team. No fillers. There was exactly zero chance that she could make a mis-identification. She was given a multiple choice test with NO wrong answers. Anyone she “picked” was then “gulity”
Standard practice for photo line ups is to show 5-8 non suspects for each suspect to make sure that a victim is making a correct and valid ID.
This line up violated every ethical standard for photo line ups published by the FBI or any state or local police agency, and you don’t have a problem with it? :rolleyes:
Edited to add: I wish we were in the first LW thread, so I could just say that we went over this 23 pages ago, and for you to read up.
Proudfeet, for the love of God, but down the actuarial tables and just back away. You have no idea what horrors you are about to unleash. Run, man, run! Save yourself, while you still have the chance!
said guest has 2 posts. both in this thread.
jus’ sayin.
and as for retraction statements - my participation in that thead - I recall agreeing at some point that it was much more likely that she was not telling the truth, but that it would have had zero to do w/stats on ‘white on black rape’. and so on.
There was a case in the news recently in Atlanta where a man was released (through the assistance of The Innocence Project) after serving 25 years for a rape he didn’t commit. I think the State of Georgia will end up giving him several million dollars.
I for one would like to step up and thank you for posting this.
Nobody here is disappointed !!! :rolleyes:
You of all people should know how thin the straw is in the man you are building by defending anyone by saying it’s quite rare that a man in that job position does what he is accused of doing.
Here’s your logic, in action.
" Do you have any idea how statistically rare it is for three airplanes on the same day in the same time zone to be hijacked and used as bombs on the same target? Please. It’s not even worth talking about. "
By all means, don’t go away. Mr. Nifong will stand trial. We eagerly await your evenhanded impartial cogently phrased missives as this develops.
You have Bricker wrong on this one. He abandoned the whole pretense of impartiality a long long time ago. At least with regard to this case. Yeah, I know, that’s quite unlike him. I don’t blame you for making this mistake.
Hence the cite.
I sort of thought the irony in my post was apparent, but I have been wrong about that before. He’s not *really *in danger of losing his life.
Are you fucking stupid? If someone in your example reached into the bucket and pulled out a blue marble, do you tell them they are full of shit? If a man tells you he won the powerball, do you tell him there is no way it happened because it is too unlikely? Leaving aside the fact that the majority of rapes are not committed on the based on race, so using that as a means of distinction is illogical. It’s like saying you can’t be raped in Friday the 13th because historically speaking, less rapes have occurred that day. How many times do you think a AA with Nigerian ancestorry has raped a white women with Polish-German background in a duplex house located within a cul-de-sac on a Tuesday afternoon? Sorry, ma’am couldn’t have happened that way, too unlikely. Race is not causation in the overwhelming majority of rape cases. It has nothing to do with why they happened anymore than the hairstyle of the accuser, or the type of milk the accused drinks. It’s a non-issue,
No, I don’t have too much of a problem with it. NIfong, wrongfully assumed she was telling the truth. Yes, there were obvious problems with lineup but let’s look at the situation form the other side. Let’s assume he did what you said there were roughly 40 “suspects”. You want her to look through 240-360 pictures of twenty something white young men searching for the 3 she accused. I’m sorry but that is a hard thing to do just using pictures. Not impossible, but, in my opinion unnecessary. If she recognized them, she would have probably been able to pick them out anyway. The obvious problem was that she was made the whole thing up. Probably picked 3 people she recognized from the party. The outcome would have probably been the same in that case. Had she not been able to pick them out, it wouldn’t really prove that the attack hadn’t happened.
And I thought it appealed to the unwritten rule that the one thing a john should be able to expect of a hooker is that she will not accuse him falsely of rape. IIRC there was already plenty of reason to believe the accusation false by the time the original LW thread got started.
Okay. You’re a twat! But it wasn’t a question of having balls but of mocking your by-now-worn-out gag of putting the word fnord! invisibly in every post. I’m sorry if that was too subtle for you. :rolleyes:
It’s not a question of the woman’s multiple sex partners but the fact that the circumstances strongly point to her being a sex worker that makes the word “whore” applicable. And, well, I guess some “exotic dancers” would fuck themselves with a broom handle if there was enough money on the table, so I’m not that fussed about morally judging a punter for suggesting she do so.
Word.
brickbacon, what are your grounds for saying race is not a factor in rape? I ask this question because you seemed to be saying earlier that race relations were strained in the community where this took place, which suggests to me that race was a factor in some other injustices being perpetrated there (white on black injustice, very possibly). If race can be a factor in one, why not the other?
See in your last sentence you go use that A word. No attack ever happened. The evidence has proved that. But by only showing pictures of a rigged line up there was no way to impeach her selection. It is a basic tenet of police work that people lie. Nifong completely ignored this, and gave her a test she could not fail. Ever. It did not matter who she picked out, since they were there, they would get arrested. She could have done the photo array blindfolded. It did not matter since any and every photo she was shown was at the party. You seem to laboring under the delusion that she was in fact attacked. She was not, the evidence has shown this beyond a shadow of a doubt.
There is a reason for the filler photos. It is done to protect innocent people from people like the LW or people that did not get a good look at their attacker.
If she had looked at a proper photo array, and had not been able to pick out her “attackers” then the police would have had to fall back on the circumstantial evidence. Which was:
- No bruising or signs of vaginal or anal tearing. (despite the claims to the contrary)
- No DNA from anyone at the party found on here anywhere. (don’t forget she said no condoms were used, DNA would have been present if an attack had occurred)
To sum up there was no evidence what so ever of rape.
So if Nifong had not instructed the police to cook the the photo array, it is entirely possible and likely that no charges would have ever been filed against 3 innocent men.
I find your comment about the innocence project to be disingenuous at best when you seem to be supporting the railroading of innocent men.
Before you accuse me of being anti-stripper or anti-hooker, I am not. I think that they should be judged the same as any other person that provides a service. Do they supply what was promised? Do they give good value for the money? 
Here is some light reading from the Durham in Wonderland blog
“Nifong withheld from the court that the accuser had failed to identify any suspects in an official photo lineup.”
"As he basked in the media spotlight, Nifong appears to have learned that, contrary to his assurances, the DNA results would be negative. But he refused to discard the case for lack of evidence, and instead instructed police to conduct another lineup. Only this time, he would ensure that the accuser identified someone. In violation of Durham policies, the lineup would be confined to suspects—now all 46 white players on the team. In further violation of procedures, the accuser would be told that the lineup contained no fillers. And overriding yet another procedure, the lead investigator for the case—Gottlieb—would oversee the array.
Duke Law professor James Coleman, former chief counsel to the House Ethics Committee, later wrote that these Nifong-mandated procedural irregularities “strongly suggest[ed] that the purpose of the identification process was to give the alleged victim an opportunity to pick three members of the lacrosse team who could be charged. Any three students would do; there could be no wrong choice.”
Read that quote carefully. Nifong violated existing procedures, and she was told there were no wrong answers. :rolleyes:
In the lineup, the accuser identified the three suspects, with varying degrees of certainty. Her performance gave no indication that she was a reliable eyewitness. After having not recognized him at all on March 21, she now claimed that Evans attacked her, and that he had a mustache—even though he didn’t have one. She claimed to be 100% certain that Seligmann attacked her—even though three weeks earlier, she said she was only 70% sure that Seligmann even attended the party. As Joseph Neff has pointed out, the lineup was riddled with other such inconsistencies. Indeed, the only player that the accuser twice identified as attending the party with 100% certainty wasn’t even in Durham that night. Nifong ignored this litany of transparent inconsistencies."
As I said there were no wrong answers, but even so she only got two out of three right.
“But Seligmann struck back. He quickly produced unimpeachable electronic evidence—culminating in an ATM video of him a mile away at the time of the alleged attack—proving his innocence. (His attorney, Kirk Osborn, had offered this evidence to Nifong, but Nifong had declined to meet, despite a state bar mandate not to “intentionally avoid pursuit of evidence merely because he or she believes it will damage the prosecutor’s case or aid the accused.”)”
Oops. Guess I was wrong.
In fairness, I was involved (marginally) in that discussion and the OP was attacked. I think there needs to be some humble pie served here because it really was a disgraceful case.
Nifong apologizes. Sorta. Kinda. But rather weakly, and with mondo caveats.
A much better, unqualified, apology.
What are you talking about?
Eh, why pay him a dime? Justice was served. Yay.
It was a good outcome. Win win, so to speak.
Yes. If he didn’t actually commit the rape, I’m sure whatever he did was bad enough.