Lying whore.

The BBQ Pit
761

Here’s the Duke PD report in which she alleged being raped by 20 guys (and in which the multiple subsequent changed stories are noted).

http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/mmedia/pdf/OperationsReportFileDUPD3.14.06.pdf

And here’s the President’s letter to the student body, which links the incident to the “memories of the systematic racial oppression we had hoped to have left behind us.” He doesn’t spend nearly as much time dwelling on the presumption of innocence, or any time at all dwelling on the importance of not affording implausible stories great weight, or the problems with a culture of victimology that affords false rape allegations such power.

http://dukenews.duke.edu/2006/04/rhbletter.html

And finally, here’s an article in which the defense complains that, unusually, their discovery requests are being stonewalled by Nifong. For instance, they don’t yet have the full hospital, toxicology, or “victim” interview records.

Some here have suggested that this means any comment on the dubiousness of the case is premature, and implied that Nifong must have some compelling stuff up his sleeve. For someone with a television-based understanding of how the litigation system works, it might make sense to assume that Nifong will unveil some killer evidence in a dramatic surprise at trial. But that is not how non-television law works – as the article notes, the prosecution is pretty much obliged to make all its inculpatory and exculpatory evidence available to the defense well before trial. There really isn’t such a thing as a surprise witness or bombshell last minute evidence.

Nifong’s failure to comply with defendants’ dicsovery requests is incremental (redundant) proof that he is an unprofessional, unethical lawyer. It is also another suggestion that the withheld information is pretty thin gruel. Of course, that could be wrong. But in a case where pretty much every other inconsistency or anomalous circumstance has pointed toward the defendants’ story rather than the accuser’s, it’s another embarrassing circumstance to explain away.

762

From ABC News: Duke Lacrosse DNA: Mystery Man Revealed - DNA was from her boyfriend?

763

And suddenly this looks even more like the Kobe Bryant case.

764
  1. You are not allowed to mention previous dubious allegations EVER.
  2. It’s not analogous, really. There, Katelyn had sex with (IIRC) three guys, including (by his own admission) Kobe, within a 1-2 day period. It’s just that Kobe claimed that it was consensual (and that the sex she apparently had after their encounter was fairly suggestive of a non-traumatized complainant).

Here, the claim is there was NO sex with the lacrosse players, consensual or otherwise.

765

Overstatement by me. There are certainly parallels. I think Katelyn was earlier hospitalized for some suicide attempt or other mental breakdown, as the “victim’s” family here has conceded she was as well.

766

http://www.wral.com/news/9236151/detail.html#

http://images.ibsys.com/2006/0518/9240273_240X180.jpg

In case you were wondering, lawyers don’t generally laugh in court, and it is especially unprofessional when someone’s liberty is involved.

I’m glad this fucking retard is amused by the circus he’s created.

767

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,195753,00.html

Wendy McElroy is speculating here as to what they intend to do, but the presence of J. Jackson and a sleazoid plaintiff’s bar “advisor” makes such speculation not-unreasonable.

A civil damages claim would be all that is needed to complete this sordid mess.

Enough wheels have fallen off here, though, that I’d imagine even the sharks don’t hold out much hope for that at this point.

768

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,196631,00.html

So these “injuries to the genital area consistent with forcible rape” do not seem to match up with the violent, sustained penetration she described.

The “tenderness” is self reported, but in any case not inconsistent with whatever inflicted all those scratches and bruises.

Oh, and what might that (or the vaginal swelling) have been due to?

Hmm. I’m not a woman, but I’d think I might have some “swelling” after getting boned by three different guys (other than the players) in a short period of time.

This is of course also not un-suggestive of a woman who may be having sex for money at these other “gigs,” or with her drivers.

Unbelievable. That moron Nifong went forward with this? I told you all there were no hidden smoking guns up his sleeve. Here we see – quite the contrary.

There’s plenty more in there, including still further alleged inconsistencies in her story and the suggestion that the dumbfuck Mayberry cops and prosecutors didn’t run a toxicology test on her.

769

[sidebar]When the “victim” is shown to have lied in a case like this (not this case in particular, but the others that pop up – http://www.nhregister.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16683028&BRD=1281&PAG=461&dept_id=566835&rfi=6), what is the rationale for not releasing her name? Crime “victims” or criminals are routinely identified, and even some juvenile criminals are. These women are criminals. Why do they continue to be given the benefit of the “rape shield” when there was, uh, no rape?[/sidebar]

Well, no prizes for guessing that – it’s the same illogic that leads to non-prosecution for false reports – "Well, she wasn’t raped, but the poor little dear’s been through a lot anyway, we ought to go gently on her . . . . "

770

Dude, the last six replies in this thread (over a period of a week) are from you. I think it’s safe to say that everyone else has moved on.

771

Why? He can always use his left hand.

772

I also think it’s safe to say it’s now well into the realm of totally fucking creepy.

773

Eh. I’ve been entertained.

774

Yes, including the three guys who were indicted, briefly jailed, are still paying lawyers, and won’t be able to attend school until at least Spring 2007.

Oh. Well, maybe not them.

Don’t like it, don’t read it.

Simple, really.

Oh, and as for “creepy?” I’d say an elected official behaving as unethically as Nifong has fits that bill a good bit better than anything happening on an Internet message board.

775

Never said I didn’t think the thread had value back when multiple people were participating. I was simply commenting on the fact that you appeared to be talking to yourself. When you post six times in a row and nobody replies, the thread’s dead, baby, the thread’s dead. It doesn’t mean anything to you that my off-topic comment got more replies than anything you’ve said over the past week?

776

I’m still interested. The case has fallen from the front pages and it’s easier checking up in here than searching for details on CNN and the like.

777

I think then you should have me banned from this board because my posting habits do not conform to your notion of what is relevant and topical.

The news about the discovery came out yesterday. I deemed it relevant. YMMV. News comes sporadically. Posts come sporadically. If you do not like them (the news, or the posts), there are two easy solutions, the one I suggest above, and the even easier one.

778

Well that’s just fucking ridiculous. Point out where I mentioned thinking you should be banned (or even warned). I don’t think you’re being a troll or a jerk, just a little obsessive.

Yes, I get it. My point was simply that the only posts that were coming were from you.

779

Obsessive, I would dispute. I’ve made a conscious effort to check in on (and when something new emerges, note) what’s going on in this case for a couple of reasons.

The main one is what I view as one of the principal structural problems with dubious allegations of any criminal activity – the very fact that the lurid accusation gets worldwide coverage and denunciation, whereas if there turns out to be no there there, things just kind of sputter out. There will never be a fully satisfactory solution to this, because human beings are sensationalist by nature, and a massive racist gang rape is more unusual (and hence sensational) than (if this turns out to be true) a false police report.

I don’t have the ability or the responsibility to change this aspect of human nature or to alleviate the cold-comfort that a falsely accused person has when the wheels gradually fall off the accusation and everyone forgets. But there are issues of individual justice and public policy implicated here, and by “just letting it die down” or whatever people have a tendency to do, we put these at risk.

And, we put ourselves at risk of not learning from the past, and of giving undue credence to future dubious claims, to the peril of future falsely-accused people. No, this is not the most burning issue on my agenda, but it is an issue, and I choose to note the continued develpments in this case in large part because now that the sensationalism has died down and J. Jackson has slunk off in what would pass for embarrassment in a decent person, the odds are that most people will just say, oh, that messed-up stripper case, and not learn any lessons from it. If Nifong had read up on the Tawana case, and confronted the lessons that should have been learned there, I don’t think he would have made the same choices he did (and that would be true even if these guys were guilty).

Duke’s current last-word on this situation is the self-flagellating and simultaneously self-justifying report about how they “didn’t respond quickly enough” or need to do a better job of taking sex offenses seriously, or weren’t properly cognizant of the grave issues of class or race raised by the issue. But if this rape did not take place, then there really aren’t any grave issues of class or race or sex raised by the event, except the issue of whether people gave undue credence to the story, and trampled over these kids’ rights, because we as a society are in fact very solicitous of preventing rape and disallowing racial attacks, perhaps to an extreme that made some (in the face of racial politics) over credulous. I don’t expect to see that report from Duke, but that’s politics.

And, if this woman’s lying, she would need to be called out on it. Conduct that is rewarded or not punished is conduct that is more likely to be viewed as cost-free in future, by the bad-actor or by others who see it. No one should think the consequences of raping someone are an “Oh well.” Nor should they think the consequences of falsely alleging a serious crime are “Oh, well, we’re bored and this isn’t going anywhere exciting, let’s all turn to other topics.”

780

No longer posting <> No longer reading. If this thread becomes Huerta88’s blog, so be it.