Posted on 01/20/2007 2:52:54 AM PST by abb
We heard about that NCCU fraternity party when the story first broke. Recently we have heard nothing about it. Does anyone know more?
Your logic is excellent.
On behalf of Concerned Duke Mothers, we are pleased to announce a Walk of Support to be held in Durham on February 4th, at 11am. We urge all of our friends to attend the walk and show their support to Reade, Collin, and Dave. Details of the event are included here:
Forget the largest context, where justice is defined by the application of the law in the same manner against the actual facts of the case, regardless of who the victim or alleged perpetrator are.
Duke Law Program Presents 'Trying Cases in the Media: The Role of Prosecutor and the Press' The lunchtime panel discussion at Duke Law School on Thursday, Jan. 25, is free and open to the public Monday, January 22, 2007 Durham, NC -- The role of the prosecutor and the media in high-profile criminal cases will be explored in a lunchtime panel discussion at Duke Law School on Thursday, Jan. 25. The event, sponsored by the law school’s Program in Public Law, will start at 12:15 p.m. in room 3041 of Duke Law School, located at the corner of Towerview Road and Science Drive on Duke’s West Campus. “Trying Cases in the Media: The Role of Prosecutor and the Press” is free and open to the public. Parking is available in the Bryan Center garage. A light lunch will be offered on a first-come, first-served basis. Those participating in the panel discussion include Duke law professors James Coleman and Thomas Metzloff; American University’s Washington College of Law professor Michael Tigar, whose high-profile criminal clients have included Terry Nichols in the Oklahoma City bombing case; and Joseph Neff, an investigative reporter with the News & Observer who has been covering the Duke lacrosse case. “This is an issue that commonly arises in high-profile criminal cases, but one that has been brought squarely into the public debate by remarks made by Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong as the Duke lacrosse case was unfolding -– remarks that sparked enormous press interest in the case and have resulted in ethics charges filed by the North Carolina State Bar,” said Metzloff, who teaches legal ethics, among other subjects, at Duke Law School. A live webcast will be available at beginning at 12:10 p.m. For more information, contact: Frances Presma, Duke Law School | (919) 613-7248 | presma@law.duke.edu
Finally, like a giant sloth realizing that it has to eat to survive, the Duke Law School recognizes that its right to be the moral arbiter of anything has been totally undermined by its quiescence save for the admirable Prof. Coleman. Should be worth the price of admission, especially if any of the half-informed pot bangers show up.
abb, if the boys hadn't gone public in response to Nifong they would have been lost completely. They had to go around the "fix" or they would have been railroaded. Believe me, we thought about it. We really weighed the situation carefully. It takes a lot of money to go big time like this, and you'd better have the money for extra security. Sadly, we went the way of most of us in this situation of more modest means.
If anybody raises a stink about trying this in the media, I, for one, would have to shout them down. It's all that's left when our justice system gets it wrong. I surely hope Coleman makes some comment to that effect.
Wow - EVERYTHING makes sense now!!
What is there on that original claim?
LMBO! Love the analogy!
Live webcast. Cool. Anyone here have the ability to capture this for those of us who may be unable to watch at our desks?
See FOX now !!!
Nifong in his bathrobe !!
Many months ago when the story first broke there were stories on the net about a black fraternity party at NCCU. I am sure there are people here who remember that.
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/1999/03/cov_03feature2.html
We believe you, Juanita (we think)
Susan Faludi, Susan Brownmiller, Katie Roiphe, Gloria Allred and others respond to Juanita Broaddrick's explosive charges.
BY CAMILLE PERI, FIONA MORGAN AND DAWN MacKEEN | "I just couldn't hold it in any longer," Juanita Broaddrick told Lisa Myers in an interview that aired on "Dateline NBC" last week, explaining why she came forward after 21 years to allege that then-Arkansas Attorney General Bill Clinton had raped her. "I didn't want granddaughters and nieces when they're 21 years old to turn to me and say, 'Why didn't you tell what this man did to you?'"
-snip-
It was a touching moment and, according to a Fox News survey, a convincing one -- a remarkable 54 percent of the "scandal-weary" American public who watched the interview believed Broaddrick was telling the truth.
-snip-
Susan Brownmiller (author of "Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape"):
I think Juanita Broaddrick's story is credible. You judge a witness when you see them. I watched her on television and she struck me as telling an honest story.
-snip-
Susan Faludi (journalist and author of "Backlash: The Undeclared War against American Women"):
Juanita Broaddrick's story sounded credible to me, but I'm just somebody watching somebody speak on television. It's not a story that I've personally investigated, so to say that she's credible is just a gut reaction on my part. That said, I have no reason to disbelieve her.
-snip-
Gloria Allred (attorney -- filed a friend of the court brief in Jones' sexual harassment suit against Clinton):
I think Juanita Broaddrick appeared very credible on the interview on NBC. I don't find it a problem that it occurred 20 years ago and it was in a hotel room -- just because it was in a hotel room doesn't mean that she couldn't have been a victim of sexual assault. Because she didn't report it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
-end excerpt-
A few Monday night thought we might discuss here, if anyone is dropping by:
1. The case has now been in the AG's hands for a week. The clock is ticking.
2. Shouldn't the Concerned Mothers March from Duke to the Court House rather than vice versa?
3. Is he Concerned Mothers march the day before the next scheduled hearing for a reason?
Not that your post was directed towards me, but here goes anyway:
1) What do you think "the public" will consider a fair amount of time for the AG folks to take to review the evidence before they dismiss the case?
2) Eveything about this case is bassackwards, so why not the march?
3) To bring media focus to Durham?? (Like they need it.) Not sure. What's your take?
I meant it for everyone.
1. I would guess two weeks would be a fair amount of time and a month would be too long.
2. Great line about everything being backwards in this mess.
3. I know if I were the NC Dims, I would not want to see a bunch of suburban Moms marching in the streets against my guy Nifong.
You too can see Nifong in his bathrobe. Go to FNC at this link
http://www.foxnews.com
and click on:
OReilly: Justice at Duke in the list of video at the right.
Thanks for posting that. Very entertaining.
What a revealing exchange, and I thank you for attempting one with Cash Michaels. I think the "army mess" comment is meant to convey his wishes that you be punished/disciplined. But, then I'm no racialist America-hater, so I really don't know what one would be meaning with a statement like that.
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.