Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AnAmericanMother

Yes. Lots of discovery yet to go, and all of it very revealing. Which is why Duke U has spent uncounted millions trying to prevent it.

One other tidbit: There’s no statute of limitations on felonies in North Carolina. And since it was a deliberate attempt to pin a rap on innocent people, there’s plenty to go around.


36 posted on 02/05/2012 4:58:05 PM PST by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: abb
Whatever became of the Duke 88? Are they going to get away with their crimes?
37 posted on 02/05/2012 5:37:53 PM PST by PA Engineer (Time to beat the swords of government tyranny into the plowshares of freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

To: abb
I'm beginning to understand how this has probably gone down.

Before you take depositions, you have to have the documents to pin the deponent down. So the plaintiffs sent requests for production to Duke and the other defendants. Duke filed motions for protective order, those were heard and the judge ordered them to produce documents, which they then produced in a "document dump" of thousands of irrelevant similar items. The plaintiffs' lawyers (actually, their paralegals and summer associates) sat around and sifted through the silt of thousands of documents to come up with the nuggets of evidentiary gold.

Those items lead, of course, to more items which the defendants had hoped to avoid producing. Another round of motions to compel/for protective order ensues - and it looks like that's what we're seeing as depositions get under way.

The judge is probably getting irritated about now. If the plaintiffs can show that one or more defendants have been playing 'hide the ball' with documents, things may get pretty intense.

We'll await developments with interest. It seems clear to me that there was malfeasance at the bottom of this (that was pretty darn clear as soon as the AG made his bombshell announcement). Just how blatant will depend on the documents that surface -- and how truthful the deponents are under oath.

39 posted on 02/05/2012 6:46:05 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (Ministrix of ye Chasse, TTGS Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

To: abb
The "no statute of limitation" wrinkle is very interesting. Some folks may be going to jail for considerably longer than Nifong . . . .
40 posted on 02/05/2012 6:47:28 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (Ministrix of ye Chasse, TTGS Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson