Duke Lacrosse Case Charges to Be Dropped

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Apr 11 2007, 09:42 AM) [snapback]421436[/snapback]</div>

With 3 sons, the whole thing scares the hell out of me!

 

FWIW, the facts are still unclear. We don't know why the case was dismissed. Wait until we hear the reasons behind it before jumping to any conclusion.

Those who came out in the press against these boys are no more guilty of anything than everyone else who heard the story and said or thought something along the lines of "oh thats horrible". In this country, the public almost always gives the benefit of the doubt to the accuser in rape cases. It's a cultural bias we as a people have. There's no excuse for it, but others shouldn't be condemned for speaking out in manor consistent with this bias.

The legal fees are another matter. I know in civil cases, attorney fees can be sued for after the fact, but i don't know how it works in criminal cases, and it most likely depends on the reasons behind the dismissal. If, for example, it was found that the prosecution failed to make their case, then i think thats it. On the other hand, if they found that the police department acted in such a way as to bring charges against these boys falsely (which may be the case, given the DNA evidence and improper photo lineup procedure), then i would think the boys should be able to bring civil charges against the department to recoup their legal fees.

In the end, it all comes down to the reasons behind the dismissal. When those are released, then we'll actually know what we're dealing with.

 

try being in the epicenter of the controversy. it's all we've heard about for months.

it's truly horrible, everything that happened, and how the word of one was enough to destroy three others. by "one" i mean, of course, mike nifong... more so than the accuser even. nifong turned the whole thing into a three-ring media circus, proclaiming the kids were guilty and he *knew* it no less, and he would *come up with* the (dna evidence that turned out to be negative, though continued to insist) to prove it.

not that the accuser should go without her own consequences. punishment in this type of situation is delicate... in the wake of a serious punishment, women who are raped might be afraid to come out and say it, in the case that the rapist's lawyer might attempt to discredit her and get her punished as the current accuser in question was. but i don't think this woman had much of a story in the first place.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Apr 11 2007, 11:16 AM) [snapback]421444[/snapback]</div>

Why is it we protect the identity of the accuser in a rape case but toss the accused to the media lions. I know we are worried about rape victims being reluctant to come forward, but we also need to balance that against the damage done by a false accusation, especially since many of these cases come down to a "he said, she said" argument with no outside evidence or witnesses. I was a juror on a trial where we convicted a police officer of criminal sexual conduct based solely on the testimony of the minor female victim. I'll tell you, it's not an easy decision.

My daughter was raped as a freshman in college. In her case, she decided not to press charges. I don't know all of her reasons for not pressing charges, but at least part of her reason was being ashamed at the situation into which she put herself. She was a foolish freshman, but rape is still rape.

In cases like these there is plenty of room for error; everyone involved needs to be protected and assumed innocent until the legal system finishes grinding the wheels of justice.

Tom

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Apr 11 2007, 11:16 AM) [snapback]421444[/snapback]</div>

Agreed- I did not jump to conclusions when the story first broke, and I won't now. Wait until the entire story is told.

 

This seems to be a case where the Prosecuting Attorney (Nifong) saw a chance to make a name for himself by filing charges where they really weren't warranted. I think he was planning on using this as a stepping stone for higer office. Saying things like he "will come up with the evidence" to make the charges stick and he "knows" they are guilty. I think the school administrators and professors can't be sued, but I hope they get Nifong for improper execution of duties and the accused get their legal fees paid. And as the guy wrongly accused of being the Olympic bomber in Atlanta said, "Where do I go to get my reputation back?"

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(qbee42 @ Apr 11 2007, 11:44 AM) [snapback]421454[/snapback]</div>

I agree on all points. But the media must feed, and these are the tastiest morsels; it's all about shock and sensationalism. I would prefer the media be barred from reporting on these types (and some others) of situations until verdicts are in, but that would open up a whole new can of worms.

I am sorry to hear of your daughter's ordeal and hope she has coped successfully with it; this is just more proof (if it is even needed) that the number of rapes, molestations, etc., are much, much higher than we will ever know.

 

I will be very careful how I phrase this. Rape, or any other crime that can fall into a "he said/she said" scenario should not be permitted to go to trial unless there is SOME other type of corroborating evidence. No, I did not say witness, no I did not say physical injuries.

This "other" evidence can include, but is not limited to

Reputation
Prior criminal record
Consistency of story/statements
(for sexual crimes)YES Prior sexual history
Polygraph results

This is ONLY if there was no witnesses, no physical evidence, and complete denial by suspect.

I realize that there were some good theoretical reasons to get rid of those requirements.....but it isn't working. Slowly, we have reached a point that ANY WOMAN who SAYS they were raped or molested is believed...even if they report it YEARS after the fact after the trauma comes out in therapy. This is WRONG, Wrong, wrong.

There are both men and women out there who LIE, LIE, LIE about ANYTHING that will get them what they want. Women LIE about rape and molestation...CHILDREN LIE about rape and molestation.

There MUST be a balance. We cannot go on ASSUMING ALL people do not lie about certain things.

 

qbee42, i completely agree with you. In many court cases of many types (not just rape cases) personal and professional reputations are ruined regardless of the outcome. However, there are two big reasons we can't prevent this:
1. freedom of speech. We simply can't protect everyone's reputation when they go on trial. There can be certain restrictions put in place, like forbidding the police from disclosing names. But in the end, if someone from the media happens to see who goes into the court room or whatever, they can report it.
2. Sensationalist media. Media coverage in this country doesn't get paid to be dull and drone on about facts and figures. They make their money by attracting viewers with stories that people want to hear. Unfortunately, this usually means stories with an emotional impact, like rape, murder, war, corporate negligence that puts people in danger, etc.


Schmika, I agree with you 100%. There is a huge imbalance in this country in rape cases. He said/she said arguments more often than not play out in favor of the victim, just because they are able to pull at the emotional strings of the jurors.

 

This article tells most of the story fairly well, i think:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070411/ap_on_...cwERH8WXNCs0NUE

The news conference Berman is referring to specifically stated that no charges would be brought against the accuser. I agree with this - unless there was clear intent on her part to defame these boys or extort money from the case, or whatever, pressing charges alone isn't reason to put someone in jail.

The facts leveled against Nifong, on the other hand, could definitely result in civil or criminal charges. He rushed to prosecute, withheld evidence, and apparently lied to the court.

The state and the University don't appear to be very much involved (but i haven't payed attention to this case and the media surrounding it, so i could be wrong). Most likely the state simply did its duty - when Nifong went to prosecute, the proper procedures were followed from the state side. Duke also doesn't seem to have done anything wrong. It had its own investigation of the incident, and shut down the lacrosse program for the remainder of the season. Such action is pretty common at Universities where there are problems and/or accusations of this nature. The lacrosse team has since resumed playing this year after more facts of the case were known.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Apr 11 2007, 02:58 PM) [snapback]421592[/snapback]</div>

IMO prosecutors try cases in the media when they know they don't have a legal case. Too bad Nifong won't find a court with the backbone to throw his sorry butt in jail where Bubba can do to him what those men were accused of. This is one scumbag lawyer we'd all be better off without.

 

Is it just me, or is anyone else bothered by the fact that 88 Duke professors rushed to declare that the three were guilty and thus contributed to Nifong's confidence in bringing these charges? Aren't these people supposed to be smarter than that? And the fact that no Duke professor stood against these 88 indicates to me that politcal correctness and intimidation go hand in hand.

http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/...culty.html#more

 

It is really sad that those professors all came out like that. However, at the time all they really know was what Nifong was telling them and the world - that those 3 boys were guilty, and he would have the evidence in court to prove it. There really was no reason to doubt him at that point.

hindsight is always 20/20.

Given the recent developments in the case, I would certainly hope that those professors would handle themselves properly and issue a public apology to the players for their rush to judgment.

 

the 88 have brought a lot of controversy to the situation itself. what they did was air out a facet of their personality that should have been kept to themselves in shame- being quick to judge anyone for anything is not exactly a trait of a balanced academic mind who supposedly considers the facts rather than jumps to conclusions.

i also hope that a public apology follows the original public letter... but i have my doubts.

also, i think a lot of the discussion, both among professors, and among students, was more internal. here, we had a series of discussions, both including our PI and not, over the weeks that the initial story came out. but what kind of controversy is positive discussion and considering each party's story? that doesn't make the news unless someone's swinging an axe back at the other side...

 

Jessie Jackson needs to publicly appologize for sticking his nose into the ordeal....I know its just the anything for extra publicity is all he's out for anyways.... :angry:

 

here's an FAQ with the university's official stands on many questions.
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/mmedia/featur...cident/faq.html

might i mention it was last updated in january and does not address questions related to the charges being dropped.

 

Berman, here are a few facts to chew on:

The professors signed the thing on April 6.

As of an article i found on April 20, the results of the toxicology and DNA tests were not known.

On April 20th a cab driver testified. Prior to his testimony, he had been misquoted as saying he say one of the strippers "clearly injured", when in fact his testimony said nothing of the sort.

Nifong at that point was telling everyone how guilty the boys were. He was telling them that he had the evidence to prove it.

Given what was known at the time the professors had every right to presume the boys guilt. As far as they knew, there was a witness that saw the injured stripper and DNA tests that the prosecution was saying proved their guilt.

Yes, people lie. But your idea of "doubt everybody until the truth is known" is pretty damn strict. Are you telling me that, if a company came out with some new, life saving device they were claiming was 100% safe and effective, that you would refuse to use it until their claim was proven?

What about a "friend" who told you he saw your girlfriend cheating on you (go back a few years)? Would you believe him and confront the girl, or demand evidence from your friend, instead choosing to trust the girl?

The very, very simple fact, Berman, is that there wasn't doubt in the beginning. It was only after the thing went to trial, testimonies were heard and evidence shown that there was doubt.