June 10, 2006

Drop the Duke Case!!

Will someone please tell me why the charges against the three Duke lacrosse players have not been dropped yet? The amount of evidence disproving Crystal Mangum's story is enough to show she is a downright liar and she needs to be locked up for her antics!

Why is Nifong continuing to waste NC tax dollars to prosecute this case? I am a NC taxpayer and I am MAD! The DNA tests that failed to conclusively link Duke lacrosse players to the rape cost taxpayers nearly $23,000. That is only for the DNA... think about all the other expenses related to this case and possible restitution the state will have to pay to the persons falsely accused in this case...

On June 8th, Reade Seligmann's attorney filed a
motion which included some additional information about the evidence the prosecution has against the men. On June 9th, Collin Finnerty's attorney also filed a motion, with even more information about the case. This "evidence" is quite damning to the prosecution. As far as I see it, the case is XX to 1... Everyone who was there that night -vs- Crystal Mangum, the Duke accuser. It is not hard to see that Crystal Mangum is LYING and CHARGES MUST BE DROPPED!! After that- Mike Nifong should be put in jail for his role in this nonsense!

FIRST PROBLEM: Kim Roberts

Seligmann's
motion suggests Kim Roberts, the other stripper who was at the party with Crystal Mangum initially told Durham police that the alleged victim's rape claim could not be true and that it was "a crock." According to the 32-page motion, Kim Roberts, told police that she was with the alleged victim the entire time at the party except for a period of less than five minutes. Of course, Kim Roberts has changed her story since her first report to try and help support her fellow dancer, get off some embezzlement charges and gain some notoriety. Go ahead Nifong- put her on the stand. She is the perfect witness for your case.

SECOND PROBLEM: Six Attempts to Identify the Players


Finnerty's motion, stated the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse rape investigation went through at least six sessions with police, trying to point out her attackers. Finnerty's attorney has requested notes and results from all the line-ups. They suggest there have been discrepancies in the identification process.

According to an article by WRAL, three days after the alleged victim told police she was raped by three lacrosse players at an off-campus house, she was shown a series of pictures of possible suspects. Three weeks later, police conducted another lineup with the accuser. During that session, the woman identified Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann with 100 percent certainty. She also picked Evans with 90 percent certainty and stated he mad a mustache at the time the rape occurred. Defense attorneys for Finnerty say there were at least six lineups, and possibly even more. They want all the reports and police notes from the sessions .

Defense attorneys not related to the case told WRAL it is highly unusual for investigators to conduct so many lineups. Police said they couldn't comment while the case is under investigation.

Links:

* Collin Finnerty's June 9th motion.
* Reade Seligmann's June 8th motion
* Kirk Osborn, Seligmann's attorney has created a page on his website with all the court filings he has made on his client's behalf. (The copies on his site do not hide the Duke accusers name of Crystal Mangum.)

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just when you think this case couldn't get any weaker, more information comes to light showing the complete incompetence of district attorney Mike Nifong.

The only thing left to make this case even weaker would be the accuser herself finally coming forward to admit that she lied about the whole thing, which would make it even harder for district attorney to win the case, but Mike Nifong would probably ignore that piece of evidence as well in his quest to maliciously prosecute these young men.

Anonymous said...

The Duke rape case also unfolded along the lines of conventional liberal beliefs about privileged whites and allegedly dumb jocks. The leadership at Duke should be ashamed. As the facts emerge, ever so slowly, it is becoming apparent that the prosecutor should be disciplined for his shocking behavior.

Betty Friedan said...

The stripper originally claimed that the second stripper helped with the rape!

Just when you think this case hit rock bottom, you find a sub-basement.

If Mike Nifong doesn't get disbarred after this, then there really is a corrupt system in Durham that protects rich white guys.

AFFIDAVIT OF COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SUPPRESS NON-TESTIMONIAL PHOTOGRAPHS

3 (b) The probable cause affidavit implies there is no question that [deleted] was sexually assaulted on March 14, 2006, at 610 N. Buchanan by three men. But three days before Investigator Himan signed his affidavit, March 20, 2006, at 10:10am., Investigator Himan interviewed Kim Pittman, the only eyewitness to the events of March 14, 2006, at 610 N. Buchanan. Before Ms. Pittman was granted extremely favorable bond consideration by District Attorney Nifon personally on april 17, 2006, she told investigator Himan [ deleted ] allegation that she was sexually assaulted was a “crock.” Instead Investigator Himan alleged that [ deleted ] “reported that she was sexually assaulted for an approximate 30 minute period.”

3 (e), (8) She told Investigator Himan first that she had consumed a 24 ounce bottle of beer and thereafter that she had consumed two twenty-two ounce Ice House beers. Finally, She told the S.A.N.E nurse in training that Kim Pittman assisted the players in her alleged sexual assault and that Kim Pittman stole all her “money and everything.”

Rick and Gary said...

One good reason to let the case continue is to generate additional evidence of presecutorial misconduct and police corruption. Nifong and company MUST do jail time.

Home Sweet Home said...

Was the prosecutor looking for votes or is there some type of agenda against one or more of the parents? Are any of the parents political, or politically minded to the point that they may have spoken publically about some political figure?

Anonymous said...

85% of DNA tests come back without a match. It's only effective in conclusively identifying perpetrators. Not effective for proving someone "innocent."

Rape kits are incredibly invasive and can be extremely painful. Part of the examine includes pulling 50 pubic hairs from the root. That's just one part of it. So it's no surprise that less than 2% of rape accusations are false (according to the FBI).



Just thought you'd like to know.

Anonymous said...

9:57~

Sure, DNA tests can come back negative if there was a crime committed. But...in this case they came back negative not only for the defendents, but all of the other Duke lax players, and the accuser's boyfriend and drivers. BUT--they did find male DNA, from as many as 6 different men--and they have not identified who those men were (and they may not know). Yet no investigation was done to find out if those other men (whose DNA was found in, on and on the panties of the accuser) perhaps committed this "crime". She lied to the police about not having had sex with anyone for a week before the alleged incident--she had some kind of sexual contact with 5 or 6 men within a day or so of the party--and never changed her panties!!!!!!!!!! eeewwwwwwww!

So what you are saying is not relevant to this case.

safety consultancy service said...

Thank you for an extra good writing. What are the local people can get in such a perfect way to write the details? I have a presentation next week, and I look around this information and facts.