It turns out there is some honor left among NC politicians.
Here is state Attorney General Roy Cooper’s long awaited statement. Not only are all charges dismissed, but he states that “these cases were the result of a tragic rush to accuse and a failure to verify serious allegations.” He declares that “we believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges.”
Many observers predicted a wishy-washy statement that would have left room for doubt about what really happened. Kudos to Mr. Cooper for the courage to do the right thing.
“In this case, with the weight of the state behind him, the Durham district attorney pushed forward unchecked. There were many points in the case where caution would have served justice better than bravado. And in the rush to condemn, a community and a state lost the ability to see clearly. Regardless of the reasons this case was pushed forward, the result was wrong. Today, we need to learn from this and keep it from happening again to anybody.”
That may get you flamed for days, Cervaise, but I will be getting flamed right along with you, feeling the heat. Because I agree with every word you just said, and only wish I could have written it myself.
I read the whole lying whore thread also, and kept my mouth shut.
I had two thoughts…“I get the feeling the OP is sho’ nuff right about this”, but also, “I am sure some jock rapist has gotten away with some crap like this before…with a victim either black or white.” So it could have gone either way.
Even after her story kept changing, and evidence of their innocence was continuing to accrue? By then, it was perfectly fair to call it as it was - a care of lying whoredom.
And as I recall, the major figures who immediately started the witch-hunt were entirely on the side of LWCM, to wit:
The Gang of 88, campus activists, and the Duke administration
and community and nationwide racist black activists:
What we need now, are apologies - in bucketloads - and a few resignations.
I see your point overall, but I respectfully disagree with the characterization that it was a recreational outrage thread. In fact, I don’t see what distinguishes a “recreational outrage” thread from news, despite the tireless arguments on here by people trying to define them. It seems like a rule-by-decree in many cases - in this case, for instance, this was a major story, as it wasn’t just a case of a rape accusation and jocks - it involved political intrigue from a corrupt prosecutor, a race-based vigilante gang of professors, a major University that couldn’t decide which way was up, a visit by the traveling racial outrage Volkswagen-filled-with-clowns-Beetle, etc. It’s different entirely than “man rapes kitten” or “woman eats own baby” - this was a major news event, that had a lot of outrage over it because there was a lot of outrage to be had.
I read the story and see that there was no DNA, strongly suggesting no sex. Minor point, but is anyone aware of Duke/NC policy/law concerning parties involving alcohol and strippers? My understanding is that this occurred in some form of campus housing - a frat or somesuch? Were all of the party attendees of legal drinking age?
Like I said, I freely admit many of my prejudices that I am aware of. But it seems to me that - at the least - some of the students involved may have exhibited poor judgment. And I guess I have a bit of a bias against what I understood to be privileged young kids who have boozy parties involving strippers.
I freely acknowledge that neither poor judgment nor wealth means anyone deserves to be charged with rape. But I think what I understand to be these kids’ rather elevated socioeconomic backgrounds will at least contribute to their being able to lead rewarding and productive lives from now on. Yeah, they got screwed (by the prosecutor - if not the hooker). But in terms of all the crappy things that routinely happen to undeserving folk on a regular basis, this one is pretty darned low on my radar.
Just to clarify: so far as I can tell, no one has ever claimed that any consensual sex took place. CGM said she was brutally raped; all others said no sex at all.
The AG’s investigation seems strongly to confirm the latter.
Perhaps it should be higher. If a rogue DA can trump up charges against well-off defendants that require nearly a year (and some very fancy legal fees) to be dismissed, imagine what can (and does) happen to those who are substantially less well off.
It would be extremely nice if this kind of behavior were only found on the SDMB. I’m sorry to say that I personally find it much *less * on the SDMB than elsewhere. In my opinion, this is what modern culture is like these days - part of why our national dialog is down the tubes. People in general pick a side in any argument and fight to the death. Gone is the day of civil conversation.
That is what was so scary about this. If it can happen to well-off kids with parents able to borrow money for legal fees - what about the rest of us? If this had not been a high-profile case with lots of media attention, would Nfong have gotten away with it?
Dinsdale, this was off-campus housing. And there was DNA, from more than one male (when LHCM insisted she hadn’t had sex with anyone prior to the party) - just no DNA from any of the lacrosse players.
Yes, these kids may have shown some poor judgment; I don’t know anyone who hasn’t shown poor judgment at some point in their lives. That doesn’t mean they should be accused of a crime they didn’t commit and end up with $5 mill in legal fees. I don’t care if they were work-study students or rich students. It was just wrong.
Beginning with the President, who should be smart enough not to take the “no smoke without fire” angle, and the AA and Women’s Studies faculty who seem to have knee-jerked purely on party lines.
I agree with you wholeheartedly - what happened to these young men was wrong.
But in reading this thread I considered my personal emotional response towards the various actors - what sympathy I had for whom. And I admit that I generally have less sympathy for someone to whom something bad happens if they are doing something reckless, careless, illegal, and/or stupid, than I would if the same bad thing happened to someone who was not doing something reckless, etc.
And I assume I was generalizing about these guys based on my interactions with many wealthy, jock/frat types I’ve known through the years. Not my favorite demographic. Just stating my personal prejudice.
Sobering. ( my bolding ) Quite sobering. As a President of a University, he should have no ax to grind. Compared to Sharpton, et al who definitely have an ax to grind. And yet there he was, saying that he didn’t know what they did but by god it was bad enough.
Really. Women watch men dance in almost nothing, or nothing. Men watch women do the same. He wanted to expel the three men for… watching a stripper strip? No. I doubt it. He wanted to make a statement that made him look angry and allowed him to pass judgement in the face of zero evidence.
Now, we have this. One waits with baited breath for the missive from our dear Duke President. Are there any bakers in the Durham area who are working tonight on a few hundred Humble Pies? Apparently a mass serving is in the offing.
The irony of this announcement on the same day that the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team holds it’s press conference to discuss the Don Imus hatespew does not escape me. Three white men got worked over publicly for doing nothing, and meanwhile up here in the Nawth, one old white racist angry bastard has a media conglomerate struggling to bury this story and reduce the outcry.
Know why? Because Don Imus just signed a 5- year extension to his contract at 10 million a year. CBC and the parent companies are on the hook for 50 million if they fire him, knowing he will immediately sue for wrongful termination.
Both situations are morality corrupt. At Duke, doing the right thing was corrupted by the zeal for personal power. Nifong should go to prison. In New York, Don Imus will walk- or not- and still get paid his money, because the morality of a media conglomerate is as usual corrupted by the fiduciary obligation to it’s shareholders.
In both cases, the young people who have a lot to lose have lost.
Pitiful.
Bricker’s post is one I cannot wait to read. I suspect he is pathologically incapable of saying, " I was completely and utterly wrong in defending the actions of Nifong." Still, a man can dream…
SnakesCatLady is right- it is a disgusting trend to vilify people for being born rich and to idolize those born poor. Rich is nice. Poor is not so nice. Neither state means shit in terms of crime. These three young men didn’t “have it comin’ to em anyway” just because they are white, or well-off. They were wrongly accused and have suffered quite a bit for that accusation and the subsequent crap that Nifong perpetuated.
The statue of Justice that one sees in courtrooms and courthouses? You know…the one with a blindfold on because Justice is Blind? It ought to be. But it isn’t.
Do you even know what my position was in the aforemention thread? I typed myself hoarse saying the sang dang thing over and over again, but it might have went over your head. It went something like
Well in a sexual assault case, the most compelling evidence has to be the accuser’s story. The implications of not doing that would be disastrous, period.
You can’t put children and other victims of sexual assault under undo scrutiny if you intend on maintaining a system where victims feel free to come forward. This is how it has to work. Sure, some honest people will get fucked because of this, but that is he way it has to work.
Second, you are condensing a lot of stuff into a few sentences, and not giving people the benefit of the doubt. According to the the defendents’ own lawyer they engaged in some shady business. During the initial period, I don’t think the DA did too badly considering you take the following information into account:
Most women who claim to be raped are telling the truth
Most that are lying would not make up such a sensational, more readily falsifiable story, and be willing to identify their attackers.
According to many objective people, Durham/Duke has a history of tension between the black and white population there.
One of the accused was recently arrested for assault, and using a homophobic slur, other members of the team have been cited for drinking and rowdiness, and have been arrested.
The players admit the accuser was in the house alone, that she was injured while at the residence, and that someone at the party asked her to use a broom as a sex toy, among other perverse things. In addition, there is an e-mail form a player talking about “killing the bitches”.
You have a seemingly convincing victim who, is injured, appears to have recently had sex, and has, at that point, not wavered from her story.
How do you not go forward with this case? I’m sorry, but just because the case turned to shit later doesn’t mean everybody was trying to screw these “good” kids. There was no rush to judgement. It took almost a month before they were arrested and indicted. How long do you think they wait to arrest normal poor people when they are accused of even a minor crime?
Now, it becomes clear later on that Nifong lied to the public, didn’t do any of the necessary leg work to find out the truth of what happened there, engaged in prosecutorial misconduct, and that the accuser was lying, but let’s not pretend that those 88 professors were trying to hang these kids out to dry just because they resented them or something. What they were doing is using the case a proxy by which they could argue for a cessation of the injustices faced by blacks at Duke and in the Durham area, and that whites be held as equally accountable for their actions. Now, obviously, they picked the wrong poster girl, but it does not invalidate their message. They obviously owe the accused an apology, but lets not get crazy. There are plenty of people accused of sexual assault everyday that do not have the resources these kids had, that did not invite their accusers to their house, ask them to stick brooms in their vaginas, and write e-mails about killing people, and get arrested for other crimes. These kids didn’t even have to go to trial. Yes, it sucks, it’s wrong, and it should happen to anybody, but it does (Often) and the selective outrage, and “deep sympathies” the victims (the Duke players) in this case is a bit overboard.
First, you’re an asshole. Calling someone a lying whore, and a cum dumpster says a lot more about you than it does anyone else. I’d find it hard to believe that you are not an angry hateful person in general. That being said, you were right about the case. Everyone who disagreed with you can eat crow, but you are doing the same thing the professors are/were and then trying to castigate them for it. I can’t believe your zealoutry wrt this case is solely due to the facts of this case. Sorry, don’t buy it. Considering that some studies have found that as many as 25% of rape accusations are false, there a many people who undergo similar or worse things than the Duke kids did. Where was your the outrage then? When Mike Tyson went to jail for rape, very few people came out to call the accuser a “lying whore”, even though she probably was lying. Alan Dershowitz wrote a book about how grossly unfair his trial was, and how he was probably innocent, yet the public outrage was not there for him like it is for these kids. That’s not to say you shouldn’t be offended by this, but let’s not pretend this is solely about a miscarriage of justice for anyone involved; there are greater stakes here, and that is the sad part. The fact they were used as pawns to make a cheap point by people on both sides (with you included) is what is sad. If you really gave a shit about people getting fucked by the legal system, you would do something about it, and not just pick a side and call everyone else names.
