This whole ordeal has stunk from day one. I hope that there is a way to make this prosecutor (persecutor, perhaps?) and the accuser pay dearly for this when all is said and done.
I mean pay dearly.
Posted on 05/15/2006 10:06:21 PM PDT by RWR8189
If there is a smoking gun in the Duke University rape case, it is not about the stripper who made the charges or the lacrosse players who have been accused. The smoking gun is the decision of District Attorney Michael Nifong to postpone a trial until the spring of 2007.
That makes no sense from either a legal or a social standpoint, whether the players are guilty or innocent. But it tells us something about District Attorney Nifong.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the players are guilty. What is the point of letting a bunch of rapists remain at large for another year? What about the dangers that they would pose to women on or off the Duke University campus?
Now suppose that the players are innocent. Isn't it unconscionable to have this damning charge hanging over their heads for another year?
The Constitution of the United States includes a right to a speedy trial, to keep people from being jerked around by unscrupulous or vindictive prosecutors who cannot prove that they have committed any crime. Prosecutors have to put up or shut up.
This is not a federal case, however, and the laws of North Carolina do not require a speedy trial.
Justice delayed is justice denied, whether the players are guilty or innocent.
What purpose does the delay serve? The most obvious purpose is the same as the purpose that delay serves in confidence games.
After a fraud has been perpetrated and it is only a matter of time before the victim finds out, it can still make a big difference whether the victim finds out suddenly or slowly over an extended period of time. This is called "cooling out the mark."
If the mark (the victim) finds out suddenly and immediately, instant outrage may lead to a call to the police, who can then get hot on the trail of the con man.
However, if the realization of having been taken begins to emerge at first as a sense of puzzlement, then as a sneaking suspicion, and ultimately -- after a passage of some time -- as a clear conclusion that a fraud has taken place, then the emotional impact is not nearly as strong.
The victim of the fraud may even be reluctant to go to the police, having had time to think about what a fool he may look like and how little chance there is now to do anything about it.
If the truth about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky had come out the very next day after he made that dramatic declaration -- "I did not have sex with that woman" -- it would have been far more of a shock than it was months later, after more and more bits and dabs of information came out, leading many to suspect the truth long before it all came out.
One of Clinton's press secretaries called these delaying tactics "telling the truth slowly."
The announcement that the trial of the Duke lacrosse players has been postponed until the spring of 2007 may be District Attorney Nifong's way of beginning the process of "telling the truth slowly."
At some point, this case will have to be either prosecuted or dropped. If it is going to be prosecuted, there is no reason not to go full speed ahead right now. But if it is going to be dropped, or if Nifong knows that a judge is likely to throw it out of court, then the time at which that happens is crucial.
It was out of the question for Nifong to drop the case before the recent election, no matter how flimsy the evidence might be or how much of that evidence exonerates the accused instead of showing them to be guilty.
Even after being re-elected, the district attorney cannot let his indictment collapse in public while there is nationwide attention focussed on this case 24-7.
What will be different next year? The public will have either forgotten the case or be tired of hearing about it. The D.A. can even turn the case over to some lawyer on his staff to take into court and see it either get thrown out by the judge or fail to convince a jury.
We will all be tired of hearing about it by then. We are the marks who will be cooled out.
He's spot on, as always.
I'm not sure he's on the nose regarding the law, though. The failure of a state to provide for the execution of a constitutional right (speedy trial) doesn't eliminate that right. If the prosecutor really wants to stretch this a year, he's either going to need consent from the accused, or he's going to be building himself a case that'll be tossed out on appeal.
You mean Nifong was made to look like the ass he truly is?
Nifong made it politcal with his 70+ pressers.
I believe the guys.
I'll wager you and every other guy would shout your innocence too and take a polygraph, right?
Howlin said something about NC law regarding speedy trials.
I am admittedly at a loss in this regard.
I hope you're right! I couldn't digest how state law could trump the Constitution.
There is no right to a speedy trial in NC.
Just as there are no preliminary hearings.
Dr. Sowell nails it again. If these charges are dropped or Nifong can't convict them he should be nailed too, criminal charges and disbarment.
And the semen in her vagina came from her boyfriend.
Surely you're not saying the sixth amendment doesn't apply there.
ROTFLOL!
With that great laugh, I am going to call it a night!
There's also a problem with her friend, the other stripper, she changed her story and it looks like she lied.
I thought you would like "miss"use. The rape shield law has become unrealistic as it is practiced as of late.
Good night.
I hope so too, if for nothing else just to get a judgment. They won't ever get any money though because the two gals haven't got a thing. I'd like to see them prosecuted criminally if they wind up being suspected of lying.
On this issue:
North Carolina has an oddball provision of the law whereby they can release an individual from custody and claim the statute has been tolled, however:
Check out:
Klopfer v. North Carolina
386 US 213 (1967)
"Held: By indefinitely postponing prosecution on the indictment over petitioner's objection and without stated justification, the State denied petitioner the right to a speedy trial guaranteed to him by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Federal Constitution. Pp. 219-226."
Dr. Sowell *PING*
Duke should pay heavily for it's role in this scam. Duke seems all-too-willing to abet.
"Nifong gets no blame, the boys are tarnished for life"
When the truth comes out, Nifong will be tarnished for life.
He is another Ronnie Earle.
Agreed. Innocent until proven guilty apparently doesn't apply at Duke.
I believe your problem is watching TV, Fox news in particular. Turn on the radio, and turn off the tube. No matter the station, it is propaganda, and intentional wrong.
Yes, it's the disgusting truth of the issue. I agree.
I mean pay dearly.
There is also the little matter of the sixth amendment (which is only directly a limitation on Congress but the right it protects is a "privilege of American citizens" proteted by the 14th amendment, both Privileges and Immunities clause and the due process clause. It's also protected by Art I, Sec. 18. of the NC Constitution:
Court shall be open.
All courts shall be open; every person for an injury done him in his lands, goods, person, or reputation shall have remedy by due course of law; and right and justice shall be administered without favor, denial, or delay.
It does, but it doesn't need to, as the NC Constitution also guarantees justice without delay in Art I section 18.
It's obvious to me there is nothing here--if the dA had "more" it would have been leaked. Fraud, phoney, liars at work, democrats of course. The players must go after their accuser for false imprisonment, defamtion, and the da for wrongful prosecution and defamation. And go after them big time.
Liese Whiel not withstanding. (If I never hear her contorted logic again, it'll suit me fine).
It can't if they are in conflict. But they aren't necessarily in conflict just because they say different things. The Constitutional provision may only apply to Congressional/Federal acts, such as limitations on Congress power in Art I section 9.
Not the case with 6th amendment right as applied to the states, either via due process or privileges and immunities clauses of the 14th amendment.
Is this actually a true statement?
I know that Nifong won a Democrat primary with no opposing Republican. Does that make it too late for someone to mount a write-in campaign during the general election? He still has to win a general election, right? Isn't he really the presumptive winner now, or will they not have a general election because no Republican opposed him?
Is he delaying this trial until 2007 because he knows he can still lose his job in November if it all hits the fan befor then, or is his job secure?
-PJ
ping
The state AG has the statutory, and likely constitutional, power to intervene and take over this case. The defendants could also file a petition for a writ of prhibition to force the prosecutor to prosecute now or drop the charges.
The re is also the issue that the defendants have been released with conditions; i.e. a several hundred thousand dollar bail. That being the case, they are, in a sense, 'confined'.
Does anyone know if the stripper( whoops, I'm sorry, I meant exotic dancer) has taken a lie detector test?
"I couldn't digest how state law could trump the Constitution"
Until recently, state law could not undermine the constitution. Recent rulings in the federal courts place higher emphasis on states rights.
You can read more here: http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/t065.htm
Exactly. I caught that, too. Individual rights enumerated in the Federal Constitution trump state law, period.
I need someone familiar with law to tell me how to fight these loose cannon power hungry POS..........what can a common citizen do?
Marked for later... I'm typing this from my desktop, which does not have the ping list saved on it, as opposed to my lappy, which does.
Yeah, hasn't speedy trial been incorporated by the 14th?
And the right to a speedy trial may have been incorporated. I'll have to check the law on that one.
Exactly right. NFong or whatever the DA's name is, used this case for personal gain. He should be tossed out on his ear and sued, sued, sued. (There's talk of a fourth Duke player who might be indicted. Why not the entire team?)
Some states also have a speedy trial statute which has specific deadlines for trial proceedings. North Carolina does not have such a statute.
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.