The Duke Lacrosse Accuser Stands by Her Story

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/advice/health/price-of-silence-duke-lacrosse

How the Duke Lacrosse Case Spun Out of Control
Heather Wood Rudulph

April 2, 2014

A new book investigates the scandal that consumed the university and the aftermath that still persists.

On March 13, 2006, two female strippers arrived at an off-campus party attended mainly by members of the Duke University men’s lacrosse team. What ensued over just two hours created a firestorm, with one of the women, Crystal Mangum, accusing three of the players of assault. Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans were indicted on charges of first-degree forcible rape, first-degree sexual offense and kidnapping. Her claim: She was held against her will in a bathroom, gang-raped, strangled and sodomized.

Because Mangum and the other stripper that evening are African-American — and there is undisputed testimony to racial slurs being yelled that night — the case was labeled a hate crime by the Durham Police Department. The national media ran with it, making this one of the most explosive cases of the decade.

By April 2007, the case had been dismissed without ever going to trial. Magnum was labeled a liar. The prosecutor, District Attorney Mike Nifong, was disbarred, fired and put in jail for one day for contempt of court. Duke lacrosse head coach Mike Pressler, who had resigned less than a month after the allegations came out, reached an undisclosed financial settlement with the university. Each of the men accused in the case was reportedly given up to $20 million from Duke. Mangum is currently serving a 14- to 18-year sentence for murdering her boyfriend.

In his new book The Price of Silence, William D. Cohan, a Duke alumnus, investigates the scandal. Cohan spoke to Cosmopolitan.com about how he thinks campus culture, a voracious media and the issues of sex and race “turned justice on his head.”

When initial allegations came out, Mangum was heralded as a brave victim, spawning rallies, fierce media analysis and public outcry. By the time the case was over, everyone considered Mangum a fraud. How did things go so far and then shift so dramatically?

I think the first thing that went wrong is that the Durham police who first investigated didn’t take Crystal Mangum’s allegations seriously. They thought she was out of her mind, just non-credible. Then they didn’t search the house for three days. Once a new set of Durham officers got involved in the case — which some argued had it in for Duke students because of all the bad behavior happening in the neighborhoods for years — these officers took the other extreme. They believed everything that Crystal was telling them. And more importantly, they wrote it up that way in search warrants and documents that became public.

The lacrosse players started telling their side of the story, emphasizing how they felt victimized. How much did this influence the shift in public sympathy?

The defense was very skillful in finding procedural errors in the prosecution’s case — and they were masters at manipulating the media. Suddenly, nothing Mangum said was considered believable by the prosecutors or the media — and the media, of course, has a way of swaying public opinion. When the media stopped referring to her as the victim and started referring to her as the accuser, the whole narrative changed.

How do we balance our outrage over allegations such as these — and a desire to support the victim — with the fact that someone hasn’t been convicted?

The justice system is supposed to sort these things out. The vast majority of cases remain hidden from the public. This became incredibly high stakes — for Duke’s reputation, obviously for the kids whose lives were at risk of being ruined, for Crystal who made these allegations, and for the district attorney who had believed her and who was running for re-election in the middle of this case. The irony is that the justice system was never allowed to sort this out because there was never a trial.

The truth is, apart from what’s in my book, we’ll never know anything more. Records are sealed, there was no trial, the attorney general of North Carolina, Roy Cooper, who conducted the investigation refused to grant me an interview, refused to let me see his investigative files. My question is, if he’s so sure they’re innocent, why is he not allowing me to view his documentary evidence? I’d think he would be throwing it at me.

When the term “hate crime” is introduced, it’s pretty hard to shake, no matter the facts that are presented in the case. Whether or not sexual assault actually happened, do you believe a race-related crime took place?

That got out in the 911 call. It placed a stereotype immediately. Pretty much every fact of this story has been questioned, but one fact that has never been disputed is that these kids were hurling racial epithets at the women. There are racial and anti-Semitic elements that still exist in Southern culture. When you add binge drinking, these types of things come out.

What is it about the culture of an elite university such as Duke that fosters this type of behavior?

This is certainly a problem that persists at more places than Duke. But I can speak firsthand as a Duke alum that there’s this “work hard, play hard” element to the Duke culture. Athletes and certainly the lacrosse players were in a very exalted position. They had been allowed to get away with a lot of very bad behavior over the years. Not criminal behavior, but cocky, bad-boy behavior that people were aware of but they didn’t really do anything or challenge them on it. It was accepted.

After reporting this book, what have you learned about the culture of sexual assault and the related culture of silence on campuses?

I think certainly the awareness level of what constitutes sexual assault on campus has gone up exponentially in the last generation. It’s clear the number of [reported] sexual assaults on campuses across the country has risen exponentially. Part of that is awareness of what constitutes sexual assault. Part of it is a greater willingness of women to bring this behavior to the authorities. But there are constantly cases of women who bring charges and they are quickly declared responsible — it’s their fault, they’re too drunk to remember — a lot of victim blaming. By no means have we figured this one out. I think binge drinking really adds to it. It’s extreme alcohol consumption, which leads to extreme behavior. And when you have binge drinking and hookup culture together, you’re asking for trouble.

You make a strong argument in the book that drinking — particularly binge drinking — is largely to blame for the whole incident. Binge drinking is one of the biggest problems on college campuses. Is there any way to curb it?

The “work hard, play hard” idea applies to partying too. With it comes a lot of binge drinking. When the drinking age got raised to 21 in the late 1980s, it became a fundamental part of the problem. You can go to war, you can vote, you can smoke, but you can’t drink? It’s ridiculous. It turns drinking into a taboo. Since they can’t do it on campus, the parties and the drinking gets pushed into houses that have been rented off campus. That’s where this lacrosse party took place. I honestly believe that if we had kept the drinking age at 18, there would be no Duke lacrosse scandal, no case. There wouldn’t be all these parties in the neighborhoods. It just wouldn’t have happened.

What don’t we know about Crystal Mangum?

After reading all the news coverage about her, I thought that she was basically a moronic and deranged individual. But in fact, she’s quite poised, quite intelligent, quite articulate and quite clear thinking.

Crystal had some of the worst personal backstory that is imaginable — she was abused her whole life, one horrible thing after another — but despite all of that she tried to pull herself up by her bootstraps. She was dancing because she had three kids. She was a single mother. She was trying to put herself through North Carolina Central University — the predominantly black college in Durham — and she successfully graduated. She’s not an idiot, but she gets treated like an idiot.

She’s now serving a sentence for murder. You talked to her at the prison. What does she say about the case today?

She still believes something happened. She describes it as somebody shoving a broomstick up her. All I know is that the police believed her, district attorney Mike Nifong believed her, and the rape nurse Tara Levicy believed her. I am convinced something happened.

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2014/04/cohan-attacks-joe-neff.html

Wednesday, April 02, 2014
Cohan Attacks Joe Neff

Author William D. Cohan has issued a strange response to Joe Neff’s recent exposé in the N&O. Neff’s article, which I wrote about below, corrected the Cohan book’s inaccurate framing of the innocence declaration. In the book, Neff noted, Cohan implies that the attorney general blindsided his investigators when he issued the innocence declaration. By actually speaking to the senior member of the AG’s office in charge of the investigation, Neff demonstrated that the version of events (which relied on the suppositions of a convicted liar, Mike Nifong) presented in Cohan’s book was untrue. Neff also observed that Cohan passes along Nifong’s words—courtesy of multiple interviews—“virtually unchallenged.”

Perhaps channeling the sentiments of his chief source, Nifong, Cohan charges that Neff’s article included “pathetic mistakes.” On the “virtually unchallenged” point, Cohan writes, “Had [Neff] read the book before writing his article, he would have known that much of the book is one challenge to Nifong after another from Duke, from the athletes, from their defense attorneys and from the media, including Neff.”

(The index to the book references Neff’s name once.)

This is a very strange interpretation of Neff’s article, in a couple of respects. First, the article makes clear that Neff has read the book. (So have I: Neff’s portrayal of the book’s treatment of Nifong is, if anything, overly generous to Cohan.) Second, given that none of the figures who wrote or spoke the previously published material from which Cohan’s book quotes had seen any of Nifong’s interviews with Cohan, I’m not sure how any of these people could have challenged Nifong. Since Cohan didn’t interview anyone on the other side of the case apart from Ryan McFadyen, the only person who could have challenged Nifong’s current version of events was Cohan, a task for which the author showed no interest.

Neff’s piece was newsworthy in another respect: he actually spoke to Jim Coman, who supervised the investigation. Author Cohan did not do so, for reasons that remain unclear. (Cohan says he did try to speak to Roy Cooper, who declined.)

In his Facebook posting, author Cohan produces an e-mail from his public interest lawyer, in which the lawyer reported that Jim Coman had called to say that the state—like virtually every other state in the country—would not give Cohan (or any other citizen) access to investigative files. It’s not clear how this e-mail is in any way relevant to the points raised by Neff’s article; the e-mail contains no indication that the author asked Coman for an interview to discuss the case. Indeed, the e-mail includes a sentence passing along Coman’s phone number—presumably in case the author wanted to contact him—but also indicating that he was currently involved in a case.

Cohan also has a new piece out in Cosmopolitan—at least, unlike in his CNN column, he’s dropped the pretense of providing a news commentary, rather than simply promoting the forthcoming book—in which convicted murderer Crystal Mangum offers yet another version of what happened. (This time, wood splinters were driven into her, but former SANE nurse-in-training Tara Levicy evidently neglected to write this fact down.) Cohan also allows Mangum—without pointing out the error—to claim that Reade Seligmann carried her out to the car, despite photographic and video evidence that proves otherwise.

Cohan also darkly hints that we’ll never know for sure what happened because North Carolina, like virtually every state, does not publicly release police investigative files. But a significant portion of the discovery file—one never released, and to the best of my knowledge never seen by anyone who covered the case, including by me, because Judge Smith sealed it—was Mangum’s 800-1000pp. medical file. That file included psychological records—which perhaps might explain why she’s now offering an even more delusional story.

In his jailhouse interview, Cohan had an opportunity to ask Mangum to publicly release the hundreds of pages in the discovery file over which she possesses personal control. Given his commitment to complete openness of all police files, I’m sure that Cohan made the request. Alas, his piece in Cosmopolitan doesn’t reveal Mangum’s response, beyond a bizarre claim that Mangum no longer has access to her own records.
Posted by KC Johnson at 6:02 PM

Flashback!!

http://www.heraldsun.com/news/x1866993068/Mangum-found-guilty-of-second-degree-murder

Mangum convicted of murder
Sentenced to 14-18 years in prison
Nov. 22, 2013 @ 06:37 PM

Keith Upchurch
Crystal Mangum

The Herald-Sun | Keith Upchurch

Crystal Mangum was convicted Friday of second-degree murder in the death of boyfriend Reginald Daye and sentenced to 14-18 years in prison.

After the verdict, members of Daye’s family wept, but most said they were satisfied.

Mangum was charged with first-degree murder in the April 2011 stabbing death of Daye, and could have drawn a life sentence if convicted of that charge.

The jury of five women and seven men also could have convicted her of manslaughter.

Security was heavy as the verdict was read about 12:30 p.m. to a packed, hushed courtroom.

Durham County Superior Court Judge Paul Ridgeway sentenced Mangum about 15 minutes later.

Mangum’s attorney, Daniel Meier, said an appeal was filed Friday.

“That’s the jury’s vote,” Meier said. “At least it wasn’t first-degree. I still thought it was self-defense or, in the worst case, manslaughter. But the jury must have found malice.”

Assistant District Attorney Charlene Franks said the prosecution was satisfied with the verdict.

“It’s up to the jury, and we’re satisfied with what the jury did,” she said. “They felt that justice was required in this case.”

Daye’s family from Durham, Winston-Salem and Philadelphia showed up every day for the two-week trial, sitting quietly in two front rows.

His cousin, Ashley Evans, struggled to compose herself as she recalled how much Daye had meant to her.

When the verdict came in, she said, “I felt like we buried Reggie all over again. I’m glad that justice was served.”

Evans said Daye “never met a stranger and helped everybody. When he saw a child who was without, his main focus was to make sure he gave them something.”

Daye’s older sister, Cynthia Wilson, said her brother “loved people.”

“He was an outgoing person,” she said. “He loved to fish, and would fish at nighttime or five in the morning. And he loved his Budweiser.”

Wilson said Daye was a painter on the maintenance crew at N.C. Central University and “a hard worker.”

She said Friday’s verdict, though not a first-degree murder conviction, has given the family a measure of peace.

“We’re just glad justice was served for Reginald and his family and friends,” she said. “I believe in the justice system and in God. He made a way for [Mangum] to get some time. We can’t always get what we want, but we got some justice. Now, there is some peace for our family and for Reginald.”

Mangum drew national headlines in 2006 when she falsely accused three members of the Duke University lacrosse team of raping her at a party near East Campus.

Four years later, she was in court on an arson charge, accused of setting fire to her boyfriend’s clothes in a bathtub. A jury deadlocked on the arson charge, but convicted her of related misdemeanors.

At the murder trial, Mangum claimed self-defense, testifying she stabbed Daye as he held her down and choked her on their apartment floor.

But Daye, who died 10 days after the April 3, 2011, stabbing, was interviewed by police at Duke University Hospital, and said Mangum stabbed him as he tried to leave their apartment after an argument.

The jury found Mangum not guilty Friday on two related larceny charges. She was accused of stealing two cashier’s rent checks from Daye totaling $700.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.