“Shabazz said the community has eight demands, among them a trial and conviction for the defendants in the case and that the expulsion from school of the students and others involved.” (bolding mine)
Seriously. Demanding a conviction. Even if there was DNA evidence and eyewitnesses, if you demand a conviction, you’re an ass.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/01/duke.team.ap/index.html
Is this tough-talk coming from the little pansy-ass who on Friday was desperately promising (on the dumbest of dumb-fuck legal “reasoning”) that he could suppress any impeachment evidence from the previous unsubstantiated gang rape allegation? Yeah, he sounds like a REAL MAN who wants to get in the ARENA and fucking . . . hide behind (non-applicable) procedural provisions to bolster his only witness’s (increasingly iffy) credibility? BOOYAH! Wait, could it be the eve of election that’s bringing out this pitiable posturing?
Meanwhile, what’s up with this?
Nice journalism, AP. If you’d been paying attention to the (by some accounts dozens of) press conferences/pep rallies this numbnuts held in the first few weeks, you might have given a second thought to that “rarely spoken publicly about the case,” or might have amended it to “did nothing but speak publicly about the case until the DNA results came back.”
About six dozen, actually.
Well, her name has been released. This seems fair, as the Duke guys got on the cover of Newsweek.
Doing a Google search will bring up the name with some history on her. It turns out she wasn’t just some local exotic dancer. She worked for an escort service based in New Jersey. So, wouldn’t she then be a prostitute?
Turning what was once an embarassment of a thread title to at least 50% factual.
This, if true, is almost beyond comprehension. Link.
Cite?
CMC fnord!
Cite for the escort service, or that it was based in New Jersey? It is absolutely unquestioned that she went to the house as a result of a call to an escort service. Google “Duke accuser escort” for more cites than you can shake a stick at.
While there is some controversy over whether it’s right to publish the name, there are some sources out there. Personally, I think it’s okay to release her name, after all, the accused have their names published and splashed on Newsweek. Either hide both parties or reveal both.
More info than you’d ever want.
And a wikipedia talk page.
Nifong is holding out the potential of further DNA evidence by ca. May 15.
Hmm. We’ll see.
Per that article the trial is a year away.
Incredible.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/more/05/08/duke.lacrosse.ap/index.html?cnn=yes
So her initial report was that 20 white guys raped her, but she scaled it back to a much more modest three (the same as her last gang rape ten years ago).
Meanwhile, this report (well, the characterization of it), in discussing whether Duke “overreacted” or “underreacted” to the allegation sounds oddly agnostic on whether the allegation was plausible/true.
When this thread started my main complaint was in the way the DA had handled things from the first. I suspected that the rape charges were bogus, but I was prepared to discover otherwise. It certainly seemed possible that something nasty had happened, be it rough treatment by the drunken students, threats, racist remarks, etc. But this … how in the world can anyone take her story seriously? Twenty guys raped her? Ooops, bad math, 'twas only three after all?
This DA is a loony.
P.S.
And he is going to make these guys wait a *year *to clear their names. Unfucking believable.
Is he?
He won his election.
He’s on chatty terms with the Black Panthers (according to them), and they and Jesse Jackson and the other race hustlers aren’t picketing his house.
He’s got Duke issuing a report apparently beating its breast for relying on “secondhand” (i.e., police-gathered) evaluation’s of the accuser’s credibility, and excoriating itself for not having a more “diverse” group evaluate the (presumptively credible) charges.
I don’t see a loon. I see an ugly little redneck cocksucker who’s crassly calculated that he has something to gain and not much to lose by throwing this up against the wall and seeing if it sticks. I see a third-rate crap lawyer in the backwoods with small-time political aspirations who may actually have believed some “criminology” class that told him rape victims never lie. I see a mean, smug little small-town tyrant who doesn’t much care about collateral damage that might be caused by his refusal to back down from a position that he probably wouldn’t have taken if he’d been a little less lazy, studied a little harder in law school, and been better at his job.
So . . . selfish, yes, unprofessional, definitely, deeply ignorant, perhaps, amoral, maybe – but loony? Not really.
Just as a bit of black humor: Anyone want to take bets on whether dumbfuck Nifong invokes the “rape shield” as excluding evidence of her initial report of 20 rapists?
The odd thing is that by all (non-partisan) accounts he is a fair-minded, deliberate thinker. I admit my characterization of him as “loony” more nearly reflects my incomprehension at his behavior than a judgment of the man himself.
Durham may be a small town by some standards, but the Reasearch Triangle area is hardly “backwoods.”
Well… as shaky as I think the claims in the case might be, given the overall community context of how it played out Nifong may be a pandering weasel, but in terms of managing his losses now that his case is unraveling like a bad sweater, delay is the only viable strategy for him if he intends on somehow trying to save face.
Oh, I agree. I guess “loony” was a bad word. I just cannot fathom how he got into this position, given the initial police reports.
I just need to get this off my chest:
I really, really, really, really fucking cannot stand Huerta88 and his OBVIOUS misogyny, which I base not on his position, but his attitude, his frighteningly shrill tone, and bizarre obsession with women’s studies and how poor widdle men are victimized by feminism, among other things. Am I going to devote a pitting to it, or even come back here to back it up? Nope. I would give myself a nervous breakdown if I tried, and probably end up banned. But he’s a trog and a pig, it’s obvious, and I hate him. I’d probably hate anyone who could look at his posts (in this thread alone) without at least thinking maybe he has a few issues with women, in fact. That’s all I have to say about that.
I feel much better now.