If being subjected to bogus prosecution “builds character”, imagine how much more effective being subjected to legitimate prosecution would be.
Crystal Mangum and Mike Nifong need some character building, stat…
Not buying it.
Well, then, it is necessary to insure that the actual consequences she suffers for refusing to recant her lies are far more severe than the consequences of admitting to filing a false report would have been.
OK, but only in the sense of a relatively easy out (i.e. making her feel like an asteroid fell on her instead of like Jupiter fell on her).
Fight my genuine ignorance on this – What crimes did she actually commit? And what consequences could she face for them?
Brickbacon, you’re going to need entire states worth of farmland to find a home for all those strawmen you’re constructing. You’ve made a lot of assumptions about what I may or may not believe without a shred of evidence. In point of fact, you’re wrong about most of them, but I’m not going to debate my beliefs against your assumptions.
As to the case at hand, you’re wrong there too. I did not jump on any “bandwagons” until the facts started to come out. My first post in the Lying Whore thread came on page 16. From the start it was obvious that the evidence did not match the story given by LWCM. The AG of North Carolina admitted as much when he dismissed the charges today, maybe you should read his statement before flying to the defense of Nifong. I’ll save you the trouble of finding it and quote it for you:
Your contention, and the contentions of others who have basically said “It doesn’t matter if these men are guilty of this crime, they’ve probably done something similar in the past and even if they haven’t other people like them have so it’s OK” is repugnant to me, and I would hope to any other intelligent person. These three young men were railroaded by a corrupt and power hungry DA, crucified by the national race baiting cadre of professional victims, stabbed in the side by an ultra liberal and PC faculty at Duke and finally buried in a tomb of public castigation and condemnation, none of which had any, any, basis in fact. These young men did nothing wrong the night in question, have in fact fully cooperated with the authorities every step of the way, and have had to deal with a full year of excruciating and public humiliation and punishment as a result. I call bullshit, bullshit a thousand times bullshit. As for LWCM herself, I call her that because that’s what she is, and my disgust with her is based upon her actions and nothing else. If that makes me an asshole, well then, so be it. If I’m an asshole for defending (if only in cyberspace) the innocent victims of a lying whore by wielding as my only weapon the truth, well then that’s a mantle I am proud to wear.
You do not understand the first thing about the philosophy behind our criminal law system and Constitution, which presume that it is far better for “real” victims to get “fucked” by letting off their in-fact-guilty defendants when the case is close, than for “some honest people to get fucked” by convicting or indicting clearly-innocent defendants.
I can help you there.
(From the OP, which I don’t know why we ever left it as it was (a) correct; and (b) quite serviceable).
I also posited earlier today that she’s guilty in spirit (if not by the letter of the law) of a continuing criminal conspiracy with Dumbfuck Nifong to deprive the players of their civil rights. Of course, I doubt she stands trial on anything.
How about DNA - can’t that be compelling?
He’s now under investigation by the state bar for such things as unethical statements that implied guilt, 3 lineups that violated standard procedures, and a secret agreement to suppress exculpatory DNA evidence. What would he have had to do for you to feel he did badly?
But she had lots of trouble identifying attackers.
And a proper response to this is for the DA always to assume there’s a racial component to any incident?
Turns out there was essentially no evidence of injury.
Right - that’s how long it took for the accuser to make identifications of alleged attackers.
Yet much of what they said seems fully consistent with that view.
This could explain some, though by no means all, of what they said. And why the rush to condemn their students without evidence - where would be the harm in waiting for facts to emerge?
It certainly weakens it badly. Engaging in poorly considered screeching diatribes based on no evidence at all and on assumptions contrary to reality is pretty much exactly what those who disagree with you would most like to see.
Coupled with your earlier suggestion that those who claim to have been sexually assaulted not face undue scrutiny, this is a formula for real trouble.
In Dinsdale’s defense, I used to live in his town and can understand why he might have developed a kneejerk loathing for rich kids.
-
She lied – uncontestable.
-
She almost certainly had sexual relations for money – the driver testified to dropping her off at two hotels for a one hour period each time in the preceding day. Drunken fratboys may hire a stripper to enliven a party. I have a very hard time imagining a single man inviting a woman up to his hotel for a one hour period to “dance” or strip. If you had a gun to your head and were asked what she did in those two hotel rooms, I would venture all the money I had that you would say “Duh – boned or blew some gross guy for money (or maybe they found a true love connection?).” People who have sexual relations for money are known as prostitutes, or “whores.” If they are also lying, this makes them “lying whores.”
-
She had spooge from four different dudes inside her. That’s where the “cum” part comes in.
-
When four different guys shoot their load in you, you’re kind of full of semen. Like a dumpster is full of trash. And when you don’t (apparently) shower or clean up or even change your underwear after the last client/driver/hobo has taken his sloppy fourths, then you are dirty and gross, like a dumpster is dirty and gross. Hence, you are in some very real sense a “cum dumpster.”
Glad to be of help.
Ruh roh. Then you’d never even investigate this case, because to be a stripper (and almost certainly a prostitute) is reckless and stupid and possibly illegal. Or to go out drinking when you’re a young woman is reckless and stupid and careless. Or to walk on the street late at night. Or wear provocative clothing.
Actually, the fact is there is some truth in all of these statements and it is human nature to say, well if they had been at the Christian Science Reading Room maybe they would not find themselves falsely accused. But in the case of putative sexual assault victims, we are told that it is strictly verboten to ask these awkward “WTF did she think was going to happen if she [insert not actually criminal but ill-advised conduct]?” Surely if that’s the case, you can’t apply a double standard to alleged perpetrators, especially when there is no Constitutional right not to be raped (don’t blame me, I did not write it), but there is a Constitutional right not to be falsely prosecuted.
Really. So you don’t find this beyond the pale at all?
From: Racist professor at Duke University *
How many more accusations, slurs, racist remarks, and libelous statements does this one professor have to make before it’s “hang(ing) the kids out to dry?” And he wasn’t alone in his sentiment, as witnessed by video coverage of the sit-ins and minor demonstrations in support of his open letter which I saw at the time he made it.
- It’s stunning this guy still has employment. Maybe we all ought to ask ourselves why that is, and what sort of person hires him away from Duke to be a Distinguished University Professor at Vanderbilt University? He sure doesn’t seem like a stellar jewel to have on your staff.
Again, I fear I have expressed myself poorly. No need to burn you at the stake. Let me see if I can break it down.
**Cervaise **posts, in his best schoolmarmish voice, a blanket condemnation of everyone who participated in the LW thread. The points he made that are salient to my question are these:
To which you respond thusly:
My question to you is, that since you have offered a blanket endorsement and full support for everything he said (“Well said, all around”,) and you yourself participated in the thread, are you ashamed of yourself?
Sorry. I was a bit worked up. My apologies.
I do not think that you should be cognizant of the case at all, but, based on your comments, it is clear that you really know nothing about it. So, it is the amount of your ignorance, not that it exists, that is overwhelming. Most of what you suppose is simply wrong, and if you want to familiarize yourself with the particulars, the link I gave you to the Case Narrative would be a food place to start.
I may be being whooshed here, but I do not believe he ever defended Nifong. Quite the contrary.
And what reckless, careless, illegal, stupid things were they doing?
Sounds a lot like the above quote from the Duke President, “If they didn’t do it, whatever they did is bad enough.” Bad form, Dinsdale.
And this wouldn’t lead you to lend a little credence to the proposition that the complainant might possibly be more likely than most to be mendacious, spurred on by the impulse to lash out at the hated oppressors?
“I don’t care enough about this case to find out about the facts, but I do care about it enough to drive by and explain to you why it’s not worth caring about it, based upon the facts, which I don’t know but would be willing to have someone else fetch for me, I guess.”
See how that strikes people as a bit rude? If the topic doesn’t interest you, your lack of posting in it will be taken as an indication to that effect – no need to drop in to explain why dropping in isn’t worthwhile.
None of the dramatis personae said that anyone “banged a whore.” The players said no one was banged. Crystal (who is probably a whore in the literal sense, but denied it) said she was banged, not as a whore, but as an innocent college girl set upon by slavering racially-motivated rapists. Why waste our time talking about whether the alleged sex was “consensual” when this has never been a he-said, she-said battle about consent?
In short, what motivates you to wander into a thread you admittedly know nothing about and don’t care about, crap on the participants for also participating in the thread, and then blather on about irrelevancies?
I guess that’s what people had a problem with.
Okay. It’s official. Lying Whore Crystal has been pre-emptively given a free pass from prosecution:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/04/11/duke.lacrosse/index.html
Fuck. Why have a false-reporting statute, if you won’t even apply it here?
As my last post to you shows, I did not jump on a bandwagon. In fact, I kept urging everyone to not jump on a bandwagon. So to answer your question, no I’m not embarrassed about anything.
You may well be right. I was, however, relishing the thought of Joe Cheshire cross-examining Mangum.
The weight of the Attorney General’s comments at the press conference pretty much carries whatever impact a resounding “not guilty” would have had. It’s quite a remarkable statement, not only because it declares the defendants to be innocent, and the prosecutor to be liable, but also for the revelation that this case may be responsible for new law in NC, pretty much rendering Cervaise’s priggish scolding irrelevant.