Additional questions and conclusions arise from this new information. In many ways the new date may be even more incriminating to Mr. Nifong. Reconsider driver Jarriel Johnson's after-the-fact correction of the date of his sexual intercourse with the accuser (after checking his cell phone’s "datebook") in light of the "marching orders" given to the Durham Police Department just two days prior, on April 4th. In his statement, written on April 6th, Jarriel Johnson describes various activities that he and the accuser engaged in prior to the party, starting on March 10th. Jarriel Johnson made a correction in the end of his statement, claiming the date of his last sexual intercourse with the accuser was a week earlier than he originally stated- on the prior Sunday. In the time between the initial ending of his written statement and his "whoops" was there a suggestion that the date needed to be backed up?
Consider as well that while Nifong instructed DPD to find witnesses to show that the accuser's nether region was unswollen, instead they found him Jarriel Johnson whose description of accuser's activities seemed to do the exact opposite. Nifong asked for proof that the swelling couldn't have been caused by the accuser's escort service activities, and instead found proof that it could very well have.
Yet, he still indicted.
Things that make you go hmmm...
Osborn Motion Containing Mr. Johnson's Statement