With the approach of Labor Day, the annual return of that great American tradition,.. the Miss America Pageant... comes to our minds. LieStoppers is not sexist, but, in a chivalrous way, we seek to recognize several media damsels who stand tall above the crowd in their reporting on this case.
An ability to continually misinform the public on basic facts of the case
A malicious contempt for accuracy
Mean-spirited flights of fancy
Vengeful viperous behavior
With so many worthy candidates gracing the airwaves, choosing Miss Hag of the Hoax 2006 will be a formidable task.
To suggest your favorite candidate, please post in the comments below.
Links to their qualifying quotes are not required, but will enhance your candidate's chances of winning. Please nominate your favorites today. From those nominees, LieStoppers will announce the lucky finalists.
Readers votes will then decide the winner.
Our first contestant hails from the great state of Massachusetts.
Raven-haired Wendy Murphy is a former prosecutor, and an adjunct professor at Boston's New England School of Law.
She teaches a seminar on sexual violence. Wendy, who has never heard an accusation she didn't like, possesses an exceptional vocal range and a keen ability to interrupt. Wendy has mastered the art of speaking in absolutes, filling her opinions with words like "always", "never" and "it's a fact." She is famous for her view that all rape claims are true, and all evidence supports the credibility of the accuser, regardless of what that evidence is. Her views suggest that she is apparently hoping for the day when all men accused of rape will be denied a trial and go immediately to a penal facility.
Examples of Wendy's more notable contributions to the Duke Hoax are below:
April 9, 2006 - WRAL [Before the first DNA test results were released]
"If the DNA isn't going to match, they wouldn't need to do this," she said. "It's almost comical that they think a photograph is proof positive that a rape didn't happen. It's not a smoking gun. It's a muddying of the waters." Wendy Murphy #1
LieStoppers: Of course, as we all know, the DNA didn’t match, but that didn’t stop Wendy.
April 10, 2006 – Nancy Grace [After the first DNA test results were released]
"Look, I think the real key here is that these guys, like so many rapists -- and I'm going to say it because, at this point, she`s entitled to the respect that she is a crime victim. These guys watch "CSI," and they know it`s a really bad idea to ejaculate on or in the victim. And maybe what she said, which makes her particularly credible, is, These guys didn't ejaculate on or inside of my body, which means she deserves extra credibility because no one`s suggesting that she lied about whether there would be DNA found on her person.Wendy Murphy #2
LieStoppers: Wendy, if the woman said no DNA would be found, why did the DA order the entire team to submit to DNA testing? Why did his office file a motion saying “The DNA evidence requested will immediately rule out any innocent persons and show conclusive evidence as to who the suspect(s) are in the alleged violent attack upon this victim”? In fact, we now know that the accuser told investigator Himan that two of the supposed attackers ejaculated. What does that do to her credibility?
April 28, 2006 – Paula Zahn Now
"And, by May 15, if we hear there were date rape drugs in her blood, and the broomstick was recovered with her DNA on it... this case is over..."Wendy Murphy #3
LieStoppers: More nonsense. There never was a toxicology report and in none of the accuser’s multiple stories she claims that she was assaulted with a broom. What did we hear by May 15? That DNA was recovered from inside the accuser matching her boyfriend. Again, that didn’t stop Wendy.
May 17, 2006 - Tucker
CARLSON: I want you to look into the screen and I want you to tell me and our viewers that doubts are not beginning to mount in your mind about the prosecution in this case. Are they? MURPHY: No. No doubts. No doubts in my mind... Wendy Murphy #4
LieStoppers: No doubts whatsoever Wendy? Even though there was no DNA match after you suggested there would be, even though there was no date rape drug after you suggested there would be, and even though there was no claim of broom use like you suggested there would be?
June 5, 2006 - Tucker
"Let‘s pretend you—let‘s pretend you understand math on some basic level. Statistically speaking, if over 99 percent of people indicted are, in fact, guilty, just play the odds, Tucker… I never, ever met a false rape claim, by the way. My own statistics speak to the truth. Wendy Murphy #5
LieStoppers: We believe this last statement should be sufficient to disqualify Wendy Murphy from ever commenting on a legal matter again, particularly on a rape claim. Her commentary has been outrageous and disgraceful. Her comments have earned her the first nomination for Miss Hag of the Hoax.