# Lying whore. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 10, 2006, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153 "2006-04-10T22:26:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 74
**Author:** ![Random](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/57b2e6/32.png) [@Random](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1461 "2006-12-22T21:12:39Z")
apparently, charges of kidnapping and some sort of sexual offense charge (that bears the same potential of 40 years in prison as the rape charge) remain. Anyone know the elements of the sexual offense charge? Or whether this step allows Nifong to exclude the DNA evidence and the accuser’s inconsistent stories about the previously alleged rape? ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1462 "2006-12-22T21:23:32Z")
[QUOTE=Random] apparently, charges of kidnapping and some sort of sexual offense charge (that bears the same potential of 40 years in prison as the rape charge) remain. Anyone know the elements of the sexual offense charge? Or whether this step allows Nifong to exclude the DNA evidence and the accuser’s inconsistent stories about the previously alleged rape? [/QUOTE] I do not know the elements of the sexual offense charge, but Nifong has stated that he has \*\*no \*\*evidence, DNA or otherwise, other than her statement, so he had to drop the rape charge. He knows this because he interviewed her for the first time yesterday. Oh, heck, I’ll say it again. He interviewed her **for the first time yesterday**. Back in April, before he went to the grand jury, he had the DNA report from DNA Security, so he knew in April that he had no evidence other than her testimony. Yet, he sought an indictment without interviewing the complainant, and continued to insist that the defendants were brutal rapists. I can’t imagine how he can exclude her inconsistent stories. No one other than her is saying anything happened at all. She’s all he has. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1463 "2006-12-22T21:33:28Z")
[QUOTE=Random] apparently, charges of kidnapping and some sort of sexual offense charge (that bears the same potential of 40 years in prison as the rape charge) remain. Anyone know the elements of the sexual offense charge? Or whether this step allows Nifong to exclude the DNA evidence and the accuser’s inconsistent stories about the previously alleged rape? [/QUOTE] according to the news story I read, the ‘sexual offense’ charge allows them to claim sexual contact w/o penetration > [@](#): > > Under state law, a rape charge requires vaginal intercourse, while sexual offense covers any sexual act. and yes, it would be a strategic move to keep DNA out of it (ie, that not only were the accused DNA not present, other specimins were) > [@](#): > > But Wendy Murphy, a former prosecutor who teaches at the New England School of Law, said the decision could actually help Nifong by keeping any discussion about the results of the DNA testing away from the jury. from [here](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16327270/). I’m not a lawyer and certainly not in that jurisidiction, but wouldn’t that strategy open up the possability for the defense to claim that she’d been raped, but by other guys? ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1464 "2006-12-22T21:36:30Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] I can’t imagine how he can exclude her inconsistent stories. No one other than her is saying anything happened at all. She’s all he has. [/QUOTE] not a lawyer, nor in that jurisdiction, however, I attended a rape trial where the defense was **prohibited** from using prior inconsistent statements the accusor made to various folks as a means of impeaching her testimony. All they could do was have her read (for example) the police report and ask if that’s how she remembered it (ie the jury was not allowed to hear her prior inconsistent staetments at all) ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1465 "2006-12-22T21:47:19Z")
[QUOTE=wring] not a lawyer, nor in that jurisdiction, however, I attended a rape trial where the defense was **prohibited** from using prior inconsistent statements the accusor made to various folks as a means of impeaching her testimony. All they could do was have her read (for example) the police report and ask if that’s how she remembered it (ie the jury was not allowed to hear her prior inconsistent staetments at all) [/QUOTE] This is not a rape trial. The rape charges have been dismissed. In the police report, and in a statement written in her own hand, she describes multiple acts of vaginal penetration by various penises, (as well as other combinations of penetrations by penises.) Since he cannot have her read those, what else does he have? ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1466 "2006-12-22T21:53:36Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] This is not a rape trial. The rape charges have been dismissed. In the police report, and in a statement written in her own hand, she describes multiple acts of vaginal penetration by various penises, (as well as other combinations of penetrations by penises.) Since he cannot have her read those, what else does he have? [/QUOTE] the term “rape” has many types of meanings - in that post, I used the term to conote the general “sexual misconduct” type of behavior, the specific charges included both penetration and groping. and the defense was not allowed to specifically enter her prior statements into the record, he could only show her, for example, the police report and say “I want you to look at this part, is that an accurate description?” the jury would not have known that it was **her** statement, vs, the cops restatement. and yes, in that case every single statement by the accusor was a substantive change from the prior ones (“I was sitting to his left” “I was standing in front of him”) varied about what acts were done (“He touched me” “he penetrated me”) etc. Wasn’t allowed to use it. They weren’t under oath. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1467 "2006-12-22T22:10:34Z")
[QUOTE=wring] the term “rape” has many types of meanings - in that post, I used the term to conote the general “sexual misconduct” type of behavior, the specific charges included both penetration and groping. [/QUOTE] In this instance, it has a very specifiv meaning, i.e., the definition of rape according to NC statute, of which a necessary element is vaginal penetration. Since the DA has no evidence other than her statement that this actually occurred, he was forced to drop the charge of rape. > [@](#): > > and the defense was not allowed to specifically enter her prior statements into the record, he could only show her, for example, the police report and say “I want you to look at this part, is that an accurate description?” the jury would not have known that it was **her** statement, vs, the cops restatement. and yes, in that case every single statement by the accusor was a substantive change from the prior ones (“I was sitting to his left” “I was standing in front of him”) varied about what acts were done (“He touched me” “he penetrated me”) etc. Wasn’t allowed to use it. They weren’t under oath. If the prosecutor enters the police report, it is all available to be cross-examined. She made multiple statements to the police, many of which involved vaginal penetration. She also wrote a statement in her own hand. If she affirms any part of either, she can be asked about any other part of either. Nifong has said (almost word for word) that he has _nothing but her testimony_. They are the sum total of his case. To prosecute this case _at all_, he will have to put her on the stand. Whatever statements she makes on the stand are fair game for the prosecution. ---
**Author:** ![Random](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/57b2e6/32.png) [@Random](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1468 "2006-12-22T22:24:55Z")
[QUOTE=wring] according to the news story I read, the ‘sexual offense’ charge allows them to claim sexual contact w/o penetration… [/QUOTE] Yeah, that’s kind of what I expected. Depending on how “sexual contact” is further defined, this could get interesting. For rape, there’s kind of bright-line to apply. Either there was penetration or there was not. And even though she was there as a stripper, lapdancer or whatever, that doesn’t diminish her right to say no to intercourse. So a jury who believed the accuser could have some rational basis for evaluating the situation, finding nonconsensual penetration, and convicting. Similarly, kidnapping/unlawful restraint is a pretty clear either/or situation. And for a normal, non sexual encounter, if a guy starts groping a woman that he’s with, I can see how a jury could evaluate that, and have a basis for finding sexual assault. But if this turns into a claim that she was there, put on a show, did some lapdances, and in the middle of the (up to then consensual) contact, the lapdance receipient touched her breast, so she objected and ran out (or some similar momentary scenario), how the hell is the jury supposed to evaluate that? ---
**Author:** ![Random](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/57b2e6/32.png) [@Random](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1469 "2006-12-22T22:37:41Z")
Yeah, I’m probably going to get flamed for that, so I should be as clear as I can be about what I mean. She still has the right to end the lapdance at any time. If there’s a videotape where she says “let me go” or “stop”, and the guy keeps groping her for more than the few seconds needed for a person to hear and comprehend what"s being said, lock him up. On the other hand, if the story is “yeah, I was giving him the lap dance, and I was okay with him touching me there and there, which he did, and through my responses I let him know I approved, but then he touched me again, slightly lower, and I didn’t like that, so that was assault”, I don"t know how the jury convicts beyond a reasonable doubt. But who knows what the story will end up being. If (as the kidnapping charge seems to indicate), the claim is that she was forcibly restrained and molested sexually in some way, then the problem I’ve raised doesn’t arise. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1470 "2006-12-22T22:48:09Z")
Here is how K.C. Johnson, of [DURHAM-IN-WONDERLAND](http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/) sums up the situation. > [@](#): > > Here is what Nifong, Durham County’s “minister of justice,” is now saying people should believe: > > 1.) Between April 11, when he admitted that he met with the accuser but found her sullen and non-responsive, and December 20, neither Nifong nor anyone from his office spoke with the acuser about the case. > > 2.) On December 21, for a reason or reasons unknown, Nifong sent his chief “investigator,” Linwood Wilson, to speak to the accuser about the case. > > 3.) In her discussion with Wilson (who was hired by Nifong to help collect bad checks), the accuser said she couldn’t remember being raped, but that she could remember being kidnapped and sexually assaulted. This is a wholly new version of her tale. > > 4.) The accuser’s statements in the April 4 lineup are credible when she identifies Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and Dave Evans–but should be ignored when she describes the three of them participating in a rape. > > 5.) The decision to send Wilson to chat with the accuser had nothing to the revelation last Friday that Dr. Brian Meehan and Nifong entered into an agreement to intentionally withhold exculpatory DNA evidence. > > 6.) The decision to accept the accuser’s latest version of events has nothing to do with the fact that it might make Nifong’s decision to withhold the DNA evidence seem less pernicious. (Quoted with permission.) ---
**Author:** ![HubZilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ccd318/32.png) [@HubZilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HubZilla)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1471 "2006-12-22T23:13:50Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] Nifong has said (almost word for word) that he has _nothing but her testimony_. They are the sum total of his case. To prosecute this case _at all_, he will have to put her on the stand. Whatever statements she makes on the stand are fair game for the prosecution. [/QUOTE] Tawana Brawley II will claim it’s too stressful to take the stand (lest we confirm she lied). More charges will be dropped. She won’t have to admit she lied and can blame stress/racism/media-whatever. Old article seems to hint that: [http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/410489p-347230c.html](http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/410489p-347230c.html) > [@](#): > > Threats from Duke supporters have forced the woman, who is black, to stay with different friends almost every night after she accused white lacrosse players of raping her at a wild party. > > She even considered pulling the plug after the case turned into a racial pressure cooker, her cousin said. > > “At one point, she wanted to just drop the charges,” said the cousin, who gave her name as Jackie. “But as a family, we told her to stand her ground.” ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1472 "2006-12-22T23:22:26Z")
[QUOTE=HubZilla] Tawana Brawley II will claim it’s too stressful to take the stand (lest we confirm she lied). More charges will be dropped. She won’t have to admit she lied and can blame stress/racism/media-whatever. [/QUOTE] It is beyond belief to me that she will ever take the stand. Truly beyond belief. Joe Cheshire will have her babbling incoherently in no time. The important question is why Nifong is continuing on, since her testimony is all he has. The end is in sight, but the shitstorm for Nifong is just beginning. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1473 "2006-12-22T23:25:44Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] In this instance, it has a very specifiv meaning, i.e., the definition of rape according to NC statute, of which a necessary element is vaginal penetration. Since the DA has no evidence other than her statement that this actually occurred, he was forced to drop the charge of rape. [/quote] wtf? you were quoting a post of mine where I was clearly talking about a different jurisdiction, and what was allowed. even here, you quoted me saying “in that post, blah blah blah”. anyhow, > [@](#): > > If the prosecutor enters the police report, it is all available to be cross-examined. She made multiple statements to the police, many of which involved vaginal penetration. She also wrote a statement in her own hand. If she affirms any part of either, she can be asked about any other part of either. > > Nifong has said (almost word for word) that he has _nothing but her testimony_. They are the sum total of his case. To prosecute this case _at all_, he will have to put her on the stand. Whatever statements she makes on the stand are fair game for the prosecution. and I"m telling you that in my jurisdiction, the police report etc were NOT put into evidence. I don’t see where either of us have specific knowledge of how this state would handle this, but the point I was making was that formany of us armchair lawyers, it may seem obvious that the police report would be part of the record. However, IME, IMjurisdiction, that was NOT the case. the accusors sworn testimony **atthe trial** was the only thing that the defense could use, they could NOT introduce the police report which contained MANY contradictions. I don’t know what the pertinant law is in that state. BUt my experience tells me that what may seem obvious to us spectators may not be the actual way it will work in court. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1474 "2006-12-22T23:29:35Z")
Hey, the lying skunkfucker drops the rape charges on the Friday right before a long holiday weekend. What are the odds of that? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2006, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1475 "2006-12-22T23:47:27Z")
[QUOTE=wring] anyhow, and I"m telling you that in my jurisdiction, the police report etc were NOT put into evidence. I don’t see where either of us have specific knowledge of how this state would handle this, but the point I was making was that formany of us armchair lawyers, it may seem obvious that the police report would be part of the record. However, IME, IMjurisdiction, that was NOT the case. the accusors sworn testimony **atthe trial** was the only thing that the defense could use, they could NOT introduce the police report which contained MANY contradictions. I don’t know what the pertinant law is in that state. BUt my experience tells me that what may seem obvious to us spectators may not be the actual way it will work in court. [/QUOTE] What do you mean by “your jurisdiction?” In the case you cited, was the testimony of the claimant the sole evidence available to the prosecution? If not, whatever parallels you attempt to draw are of little value. Please try to understand this. She will have to take the stand. She will have to point out her assailants. Once she does, the photo array will be introduced. She will then be asked why she identified the defendants as the men who raped her, and later decided that she is no longer sure whether a rape occured. This is not about prior statements. This is about the substance of the ID process. I honestly fail to see what you are on about. Your anecdote of winessing a trial, devoid as it is of pertinent facts, is meaningless. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2006, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1476 "2006-12-23T00:19:55Z")
Even in this third version the prosecution has suggested, Seligmann cannot have commited a crime. > [@](#): > > Here’s the New York Times, quoting what is almost certainly Linwood Wilson: > > ``` > When she was interviewed on Thursday by an investigator from the district attorney’s office, the woman said she was penetrated from behind while she was bent over with her face toward the floor, but did not know with what, according to a person close to the investigation who would only speak on condition of anonymity. > > ``` > > Here’s the accuser and Sgt. Mark Gottlieb on April 4, with the accuser describing the attack from Reade Seligmann: > > ``` > Gottlieb: How did he assault you? Which one was he? > > Accuser: He was the one that was standing in front of me . . . um . . . that made me perform oral sex on him. > > Gottlieb: What else did he do? > > Accuser: That was it. > > ``` > > Even accepting Nifong’s latest version of events as 100 percent true, how, exactly, did Reade Seligmann commit a crime? Did he at some point slide underneath the accuser to perform the act that she alleged? From DURHAM-IN-WONDERLAND. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2006, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1477 "2006-12-23T00:39:11Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] What do you mean by “your jurisdiction?” [/quote] my state, MI > [@](#): > > In the case you cited, was the testimony of the claimant the sole evidence available to the prosecution? If not, whatever parallels you attempt to draw are of little value. yes, accusors statement was the sole evidence, which was why I believe it’s pertinent > [@](#): > > Please try to understand this. She will have to take the stand. She will have to point out her assailants. Once she does, the photo array will be introduced. She will then be asked why she identified the defendants as the men who raped her, and later decided that she is no longer sure whether a rape occured. This is not about prior statements. This is about the substance of the ID process. > > I honestly fail to see what you are on about. Your anecdote of winessing a trial, devoid as it is of pertinent facts, is meaningless. listen carefully, then. yes, she’ll have to take the stand. yes, she’s make her accusation and point at the guys. BUT unless you have some information that demonstrates that in that jurisdiction, the police statement(s) etc WILL be introduced (mustbe, can be), then her prior inconsistencies would not be known by the jury. As I stated, I was surprised that prior statements to the cops by the accusor would not be introduced in court and that the defense could not bring them out. It ran contrary to my expectations of how thingswould work. Now, I admit that it might just be that way in my state, but I think that’s unlikely, and IF it runs the same in this case, then her prior inconsistent statements would NOT be able tobe introduced by the defense (though I suspect w/all the publicity folks would probably be aware). note I think this woman is not telling the truth, I think the prosecutor is on a blind vendetta, unable to admit he’s wrong. but this maneuver may indeed allow him to get convictions nonetheless. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2006, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1478 "2006-12-23T03:40:19Z")
Could the defense demand an immediate jury trial? There is no way a jury is going to believe anything the accuser says. ---
**Author:** ![HubZilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ccd318/32.png) [@HubZilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HubZilla)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2006, 8:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1479 "2006-12-23T08:18:37Z")
[QUOTE=DanBlather] Could the defense demand an immediate jury trial? There is no way a jury is going to believe anything the accuser says. [/QUOTE] Don’t be so sure: The racial makeup of [the city](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durham%2C_North_Carolina) was 45.50% White, 43.81% African American, Load up the jury right, and it will be OJ all over again. After all, they re-elected Nifong… ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2006, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/1480 "2006-12-23T12:16:24Z")
[QUOTE=wring] my state, MI yes, accusors statement was the sole evidence, which was why I believe it’s pertinent listen carefully, then. yes, she’ll have to take the stand. yes, she’s make her accusation and point at the guys. BUT unless you have some information that demonstrates that in that jurisdiction, the police statement(s) etc WILL be introduced (mustbe, can be), then her prior inconsistencies would not be known by the jury. [/QUOTE] North Carolina’s Open Discovery Law requires the prosecution to turn over its entire file to the defense. This file includes all of the police reports, as well as the victim’s hand written statement. They are now evidence in the case at hand. Now, I cannot predict the future, but the defense attorney’s seem pretty sharp to me. If the witness takes the stand, which she must for the trial to proceed, she will be put under oath, at which point she will be compelled to confront the evidence of her statement, and confirm or deny it. Similarly, if any police officer is put on the stand, his report in its entirety will be intruduced as evidence. The reports themselves are full of inconsistencies. How, exactly, do suggest that only the parts favorable to the prosecution will be allowed? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153.md?page=73) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153.md?page=75)