Wednesday, August 02, 2006

New Tests? Old?

Today, the News & Observer followed the Herald Sun's lead to continue the DNA results non-story into day two. While the N&O does add the additional information of Matt Zash being the source of semen found on the floor of the infamous bathroom, the greatest difference between the two articles is that one article refers to the matched DNA samples as being from semen while the other refers to one sample being semen and the other being from a "specimen" of some unnamed type. Clearly the use of the word "specimen" in contrast to the more incriminating word "semen" seems to imply that the specimen was not semen.

In Benjamin Niolet’s article, he states:
"Investigators looking into allegations of rape at a Duke University lacrosse party recovered two positive DNA specimens from players who lived at the house, according to a defense attorney....One of the DNA samples, semen recovered from a bathroom where the woman said she was raped, belonged to Matt Zash, a team captain...Another specimen matched to Evans was recovered from a towel found in a hallway near Evans' room and the second bathroom in the house."
No where in his article does Mr. Niolet inform us that this match to Evans is from semen. He appears to take pains to avoid the mention of the semen word with regard to Evans. Is this telling us that it was not semen or is the article imprecise on this detail.

In John Stevenson’s article he states:
"Semen found in the house where three Duke lacrosse players allegedly raped an exotic dancer matches the DNA of two team members...According to the sources, semen on a towel was DNA-linked to Evans."
Clearly, Stevenson is very specific in his characterization that the source material on the Evan’s match was semen. As much as we like to pick at Mr. Stevenson for his tendency to spin his coverage in Mr. Nifong’s favor, it is difficult to imagine that he would get this item wrong even accidentally. Mr. Niolet’s report, however, seems far more in line with previous coverage from all sides. Could this discrepancy indicate that Mr. Stevenson’s sources are more forthcoming that Mr. Niolet’s? If this is the case, does it give us clues as to where those sources may reside? Did Stevenson simply get it wrong? If so, was this error accidental or intentional?

In any event, we remain convinced that the "new" reports are non factors and the reporting in both instances appears to be woefully insufficient. Whether the answer be semen or specimen, neither article alludes to the fact that the DNA matches were contained in the first DNA report and disclosed by defense attorneys on April 10th, immediately after they received that report. In fact, reading both articles it is reasonable to assume that they are talking about additional tests.

As pointed out by several people yesterday, including John in Carolina ,not only did the defense attorneys disclose this information in a press conference, but that fact was immediately reported by both WRAL and the News & Observer and is available for all to see.

News & Observer, April 11th
They also found no DNA on the woman's clothing or belongings, players' attorneys said. The tests found DNA matches to two players, from a towel outside the bathroom and on another object, Cheshire said.One sample was from a player's semen and another was a different type of DNA, Cheshire said. He said that was to be expected in a bathroom shared by the three men who lived in the house.
WRAL April 10th
Answering questions from reporters, defense attorney Joe Cheshire did say that DNA of two of the men was found on a towel and on the floor of the bathroom, but that it was not in any way related to the DNA found on the alleged victim."The bathroom where this DNA was found happened to be the bathroom of the two boys," Cheshire said. "And any expert and any person in the world will tell you that your DNA is in your bathroom."
As evident from these articles, Joe Cheshire clearly stated the following things:

(i) there were two matches, including semen
(ii) one match was on the floor of the bathroom and the other was on a towel
(iii) the two matches were to players who lived in the house

Yesterday, and today, the Herald-Sun and the News & Observer have reported this information as if were new. The Herald-Sun used the more egregious language about "previously undisclosed" matches, but the News & Observer used an equally misleading headline "Two DNA Tests Are Positive." The only new information in the articles is that the towel had semen matching Evans, according to one, and the floor had semen matching Zash, according to the other.

If anything, this information, despite the contradictions, should be positive for the defense because it is Zash's DNA actually on the floor of the bathroom, not Evans'. Yet, that is clearly not how either newspaper reported the information. In addition, the Herald-Sun half-disclosed/half didn’t disclose the fact that the bathroom DNA matched Zash. The article stated, "Lawyer Bill Thomas, who represents an unindicted lacrosse player -- but not the one whose semen was discovered on the bathroom floor -- agreed. …Lawyer Kerry Sutton, also representing an unindicted lacrosse player, [hmmm, perhaps the one whose semen was on the floor?] said essentially the same thing.".

At least the N&O explicitly stated that fact, instead of just strongly hinting. The omission of the fact that Cheshire revealed this information in April is extremely important because defenders of the District Attorney have told the public to wait for the trial because the defense is either lying or spinning evidence. The District Attorney himself has made this claim in at least two of his extrajudicial comments (both of which were made after arrests were made, which is when Nifong claims he stopped talking to the press).

First, after his primary election he told WRAL the following:
"My guess is that there are many questions that many people are asking that they would not be asking if they saw the results," Nifong said. "They're not things that the defense releases unless they unquestionably support their positions," Nifong said. "So, the fact that they're making statements about what the reports are saying, and not actually showing the reports, should in and of itself raise some red flags."
"Nifong: Defense Attorneys ‘Don’t Know What My Timeline Is."

Second, in Nifong's e-mail to Susannah Meadows, he said the following:"As an example, when those attorneys held press conferences to announce that the first round of DNA testing "completely exonerated" the players (a claim that, on its face, is rather preposterous), I saw not a single report that any reporter had actually seen the test results (none of them had), or had asked to see them and had that request denied (which is what happened to those who bothered to ask)."

By reporting the DNA results non-story as new "previously undisclosed" information, the Herald-Sun and, and to a lesser degree, the News & Observer are supporting the District Attorney's story of deceptive defense attorneys. They are also failing to report the real story of a deceptive prosecutor. These articles indicate that both newspapers are doing their best to keep Nifong’s lies alive and ensure Durham will get a spectacle of a trial. They also indicate that both publications believe their readers are (i) stupid, (ii) not following the case very closely or (iii) incapable of internet research.


Anonymous said...

I see The DA's Office is back to their old tricks! Leaking! I suspect some bad news will be coming down for the DA soon, as the last time this happen we found out the DNA match was the boyfriend.

Anonymous said...

So who's getting smeared here? The precious alleged victim, or somebody who sat in his room watching Letterman and apparently never even laid eyes on her?

Anonymous said...

LieStoppers-- I thought the same thing....why are these publications reporting this as new information? Furthermore, what the hell does it matter?

What will we hear next? That Finnerty and Seligmann left their DNA in their own dorm rooms?

Anonymous said...

This news is worthless & Nifong knows it. You have to be able to tied any evidence to the AV. What really matters is no sweat, semen, blood,saliva, seminal fluid, or hair was found in her, on her, or on her clothes matching any Lacrosse Player in two sets of tests.

If DNA wasn't found on a towel it would be a miracle. How low can Nifong go?

Anonymous said...

I have a question for Liestoppers. I was wondering, do you think they found any of the accused victim's DNA at her house or her parent's house??

A disgruntled ex-wife said...

HuH? Precious doesn't have a house.

She lives w/her parents in their house. If Jarriel's statement is part of her normal routine, she didn't stay there long enough to leave any dna.

Well there might still be two specimans there unless Crystal Meth sent some stranger to pick up the kids.

Tony Soprano said...

Nifong's "Evidence" turns on him.

Matt Zash's semen is out of the picture for trial. What would the prosecution's theory be, we indicted the wrong guys, and one of the first players our crack investigative staff eliminated is the real rapist?

Not likely. So, forget about Zash's DNA in his own bathroom.

Evans towel, near a DIFFERENT Bathroom, has someone else's DNA, that is NOT semen, comingled with his. The source is likely one of 3,000 women on Campus or someone visiting. The towel has no link whatsoever to the AV - NONE.. The investigators can NOT tie the towel to the "other" bathroom or alleged crime scene either. This DNA is akin to finding Evans semen and an unidentifed females in the back seat of his car. This proves that a 23 year old College Senior is sexually active.

Unless Evans takes the stand and says he's a Virgin, the Towel is worthless.

So, we are back to the Fingernails in a filthy frat-house bathroom trashcan.

Let us examine the fingernails. Nifong took to the airwaves and demonstrated a Choke hold on the Abram's Report. A choke hold and sequence that he said was consistent with the "victim's" story. In fact, early in the case, this strangulation was used in official court documents presented to Judges to justify search warrants and other Police actions. We now know that the alleged victim stated at Duke Medical Center during her rape examination that she was NOT strangled. The Medical personnel reportedly also stated that there were no physical signs of choking or strangulation. Photos taken at the Party show the woman entering the residence with a couple fingernails missing and some unpainted. These fingernails has a life cycle and when they've done their duty - they fall off rather easily. The photos of her entering the residence will attest to the fact that her fingernals were at the end of their life cycle. When Mike Nifong was in the throws of his burgeoning thespian career, and he demonstrated the dramatic choke hold (big mistake Mike) and stated it was consistent with the woman's story, he also stated that she had to fight to breathe, summoning all her strength, we are to believe, the woman fought off three to 20 elite college athletes and at least one other stripper - in this process she broke off most of her nails in her attackers forearms, and she fled the house - lucky to have escaped with her life. This makes the Photo of the woman leaving the house at 12:31 am, standiing and smiling, very peculiar, to say the least.

At some unspecified time since the March 13th party and Nifong's Media tour, the Felonious Strangulation charge dissappeared.
Poof - gone, huh? None of the 3 men are charged with felonious strangulation, yet the charge was used to secure evidence and court approval for Police actions against all 3 men. Could it be that when Nifong's tour ended and when he was recovering in a hot tub, he actually read the Duke Medical report? It appears Nifong came to see that the medical tests done at Duke revealed no strangulation - and the woman plainly stated to medical personnel that she wasn't strangled.

Once the truth had shoes, and information started dribbling out, we found out the uncooperative and obstructionist Lacrosse Players living at the house actually collected the fingernails from the bathroom trashcan and gave them to investigators.

It seems, from what we know, that not only has the DNA evidence against the players totally disintegrated, but the victim's own story surrounding how her nails came to be in that bathroom is not even believed by her champion - Mike Nifong.


Anonymous said...

What's the story on the "editors" of these newspapers?

Anonymous said...

Hooray for all of you! What a relief to read these intelligent posts and the dismemberment of Nutfong's "case. THANK YOU!

Anonymous said...

the point of these stories in the local press is to show up the omissions of the defense and help the DA's office. At no time previously was it ever stated that Evans was positive on a towel found at the scene. His attorneys knew this at the time of the press conference and said nothing as they know it is not as minimal as you seem to think. Semen near the scene of a rape has to be explained and this will come up at trial.

There are two semen specimens on the same towel--do men routinely use a towel with someone else's dried semen on it? Don't think so. Maybe this is some type of mop up or something. Reports say semen was also on the floor as well. As for the other type of specimen--nowhere was it mentioned that it was female vaginal cells--that is just a speculation. If it turns out to be saliva--well, the accuser said she was raped orally and spat it out on the floor. Oh well. I know you can spin that as well. Good luck--I have a feeling you will need it as the press is no longer going to take whatever the defense says at face value--both local papers are now helping Nifong.

Anonymous said...

As to the local papers, the thurs. Herald has an article about Monks and he is trying to run and he accuses Cheek of dirty politics and discusses this ABN campaign indirectly by saying that he would not support it as the people of Durham care who is their DA. OUCH!

As i said above, the local papers are supporting Nifong.

LieStoppers said...

To the 2:45 and 2:49 poster:

We've seen previously that math is not a particularily strong suit of yours and now you demonstrate for us that reading comprehension is also a shortcoming. Perhaps it is just the truth you take issue with? There are not two semen samples on the towel in question. This has never been reported anywhere and exists only in your mind. You have invented this scenario in an effort to distort the truth. Please keep your lies to yourself. It has been reported that the second DNA sample is from non-semen. Non, fwiw, means not.

Why is it that you feel you need to support your position with lies and insinuations? Was your intention in falsely stating that two peoples semen was found on a towel to imply that it must have been used during the phantom rape or that it was used for a homosexual act? Both of your nasty insuations are based on your lie that two people's semen was found on the towel. Why lie? It doesn't change anything and only makes you look petty, foolish and weak. Are your lies motivated by hatred or anger? Do you expect other people will believe your lies or the bogus arguments you base on your inventions? Again, why lie?

To further clarify your mistatements, both papers do not state that there is even one sample of semen on the towel, let alone two. The two articles you refer to contradict each other in this regard and are not identical as you previously attempted to claim. Perhaps reading before posting would be advised.

Reports say semen from an exonerated person was found on the floor. Please tell, how in the world this bolsters your lies or the case for rape against the three falsely accused young men? It doesn't.

You state that the false accuser spit out ejaculate on the floor? Thank you for another lie. To state that one of the falsely accused ejaculated in her mouth and that she spit it out defies both science and truth. Had this been true there would surely have been evidence recoverd on the oral swab taken during her SANE exam. There was not. Further, nowhere in the bathroom was any of her DNA found. Was hers the immaculate spit? Your suggestion that that this transpired is as transparent as hers.

Regardless of how badly you want this fable to be true and no matter how many lies, you or the false accuser or Mr. Nifong tell in this attempt to distort opinions and no matter how often you choose to tell these lies, it will not change the truth. The truth cannot be changed by you nor by anyone else. It is what it is and you, sir, are what you are. You have, again, revealed yourself to be a liar.

But, hey, thanks for posting at LieStoppers.

Anonymous said...

Immaculate ejaculation ... LOL

Anonymous said...

You are the liar--the News and Observer story confirms not one but two semen samples positive--one from Evans and one from another unindicted player--please note unindicted, not exonerated. HA!

And I never mentioned /implied about homosexuality at all--you are doing that. I do know that young men do not routinely use towels with semen on them from someone else if they can help it. That is why I mentioned this towel could have been used to clean up or something and that is how two samples got on the towel. As to me making this up the News and Observer even printed the second player's name whose semen tested positive on the towel. Maybe you are the one who needs to read! There were two semen samples positive on the towel and one sample on non-semen DNA--per both the Herald and the News and Observer.

Anonymous said...

The rumors persist on the towel. They are on other sites too.

People are saying Crazy Wendy Murphy was right.

They was only one semen sample on the towel - a towel that wasn't anywhere near the bathroom in question.

We know people that can write here, can also read. But, why do they ignore the facts. Why persist in rumors.

I think it's agenda driven.

Anonymous said...

In Regard to the 5:09 am Post:

Can't you read? Can you process English? It has been explained in multiple ways above.

From the News & Observer:
"One of the DNA samples, semen recovered from a bathroom where the woman said she was raped, belonged to Matt Zash, a team captain, his attorney said Tuesday.

Zash, who has been eliminated as a suspect, apparently was watching television in his room while the March party went on. Nifong has said that none of the state's evidence implicates any player other than the three who were indicted earlier this year.

"The fact that Mr. Zash's DNA in any form was found in his own bathroom is evidence of nothing related to his case," said Kerry Sutton, Zash's attorney.

Another specimen matched to Evans was recovered from a towel found in a hallway near Evans' room and the second bathroom in the house. The towel also contained DNA from another person, and SBI testing has conclusively determined that the second specimen DID NOT MATCH the accuser or the 46 members of the lacrosse team who submitted DNA samples, Sutton said."

From the Herald-Sun:

"According to the sources, semen on a towel was DNA-linked to Evans.

The towel was retrieved from a hallway at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd., where Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann are accused of raping an exotic dancer during an off-campus lacrosse party in mid-March.

The towel also contained non-semen-based DNA from someone else, the sources said. They said the other DNA did not match the alleged rape victim or any of more than 40 Duke lacrosse players who gave bodily samples for analyses.

The implication is that Evans had sex with someone other than the accuser, then used the towel to clean himself, defense sources contend."

From me:


Tillie said...

To the 5:09 poster
Come on down and post on the Tillie thread. You're out of your intellectual element up here.

Though it might be dangerous for a "bone"-head.

Woof! Woof!

LieStoppers said...

Has the News and Observer printed a new article as the 2:45am/2:49am/5:09 poster claims or are we dealing with a lunatic, a compulsive liar or an illiterate above?

Anonymous said...

This, methinks, is an equal opportunity idiot. Skates around the web posting at CTV and ABC11.

Never encumbered by a need for factual accuracy, his pontifications are easy to recognise and painfully easy to rebut.

What fun to have him here!

buckeye blonde said...

I sent this letter to Bob Ashley about the local coverage. Great blog, by the way.

"Dear Bob, I live in Youngstown, Ohio. This used to be a hinky little city, much like your Durham. A few years ago, the FBI came to town. When they left, they took a few local citizens with them.

Our District Attorney., our Sheriff, the road commissioner, a few judges, and our Congressman( the sadly not- so -Honorable James Traficant) all donned orange jumpsuits and are now otherwise employed making license plates for the State of Ohio. Perhaps that is why I am drawn to read your newspaper each morning. It is boring these days in Youngstown.

When Mr. Nifong invited me to your town, appearing night after thrilling night on my TV screen last Spring, I immediately felt a sense of belonging. I am fascinated now. But enough about my town, I have a few questions about yours.

I notice some teenagers from Cary have been charged with ethnic intimidation, for pushing and threatening another young man.Hmmm? Any news on the mysterious bald instigator of the Blinco's escapade? I noticed a quote in your paper that "they got the wrong guys" or something like that. Neither of the police perps are bald. Why no media pressure on this? Surely racial intimidation and assault by local law enforcement is a bigger, more important story to Durham than a teenage dust-up on a dock. But it all seems to be going away. Why? Where's Baldo?

A not-so-new, but pro-prosecution story appeared in your paper yesterday... about DNA. I thought there was a gag order?. Watching on Court TV , I notice BOTH local judges ( up for election, aren't they?) allowed Nifong to make obnoxious personal remarks IN COURT without reproach. Wonder why? The date on the suboena for the DNA tests appears to cite facts in a medical report YET UNDELIVERED to the DA. Weird, no?

Since the Newsweek story, Nifong's credibility has been dissected I won't rehash. However, Nifong's press conference vs. your interview with Cheek ...offered some new examples of Nifong's "veracity impairment" As the HS said in your article, Nifong gave the "impression" that his meeting with Cheek et al. concerned the Lacrosse case. Cheek said the meeting took place over a week BEFORE the Lacrosse case began.Newsweek showed us point by point that Nifong is fond of giving impressions of things that just aren't so. Integrity, trust and truthfulness used to be the very least one expected in a District Attorney.

Unless things are they used to be in Youngstown.

Perhaps my suspisions are unfounded,....the result of past trauma, of living under a corrupt judicial regime that served no one but itself. I am just asking questions from miles away. Are local people asking questions too?

Maybe what is needed, Bob, is not a "Durham solution" but a Youngstown solution.

Shall I forward the phone number for the FBI?

LieStoppers said...

Buckeye Blonde: Thank you for sharing your letter to Mr. Ashley and for your gracious comments on our blog. Please don't be too disappointed if Mr. Ashley chooses not to publish your letter as it opposes his editorial direction. Feel free to post any other letters you send to Mr. Ashley here or send via email if you'd like. It would be interesting to compile, and then publish, a collection of the letters that Mr. Ashley declines to run as he continues his campaign to manipulate rather than inform.

Anonymous said...

Here's what I sent.

Mr. Stevenson,

The information you "broke" in this story is not new. It was first disclosed in Joe Cheshire's news conference of April 10, 2006.

"They also found no DNA on the woman's clothing or belongings, players' attorneys said. The tests found DNA matches to two players, from a towel outside the bathroom and on another object, Cheshire said.

One sample was from a player's semen and another was a different type of DNA, Cheshire said. He said that was to be expected in a bathroom shared by the three men who lived in the house."

Nowhere in your story did you say that this information has been reported before, let alone disclosed by the defense team.

This is fraudulent reporting. You and your editors are being continually monitored to expose such journalistic fraud.

Walter Abbott

LieStoppers said...

Mr. Abbott - Thank you for sharing. We will continue taking Mr. Stevenspin to task and appreciate your help in that effort. Your contribution today encourages us further to compile and publish the letters to the Herald Sun. We know that some readers, in fear of persecution, may choose to remain anonymous when sharing the letters the send with us. We will protect that anonymity but do applaud your courage in identifying yourself.

Anonymous said...

A week or so ago, NandO's Melanie Sill was bellyaching about all the anonymous posters, so I put my name on all the stuff I send in there.

I've been a long time poster on FreeRepublic (which was THE FIRST bulletin board to call bull#hit on this hoax) and my name and home town is listed in my public profile.

Besides, I WANT the bastards to know who I am, lol...

Walter Abbott

Anonymous said...

I agree with Mr. Abbott.

We should've all been calling this a Hoax as soon as the first DNA results came back.

How can the N&O call itself a news organization? Are they that detached and insulated over there.

They should make Ricardo Maltaban the Editor over there and call it the
Fantasy Observer.

Look Boss, De News, De News!

A disgruntled ex-wife said...

Dear LieStoppers:

Who let the dogs out? Did Pavlov give up on testing his canine council?

Too bad they remain illiterate and veracity-challenged. The mangy mutts are unfit to board in our safe shelter.

Perhaps there should a poster of these "posters?" You could include their mutt shots and screen names so innocent, unsuspecting blog readers will not be turned off by their pack of lies.

Cheers! Candy Dares

Anonymous said...

LieStoppers said...
Has the News and Observer printed a new article as the 2:45am/2:49am/5:09 poster claims or are we dealing with a lunatic, a compulsive liar or an illiterate above?

This person is a mix of everything…lunatic – yes, compulsive liar – oh yeah, illiterate – appears so.

The poster goes by the screen name “skatemd” on the wtvd11 and courttv message boards. He/she/it claims to be a doctor and has been spouting their useless drivel since this case began. The posters at courttv are lucky…they have an ignore function on their board. We, at the wtvd11 board, are not so lucky.

If this tells you anything…Trash Michaels personally thanked skatemd for defending him on the wtvd11 board, when we were tearing to shreds Trash’s essay on the 2 million dollar hush money claim by Jakki The Shim.

Hopefully, you now have a better idea of the idiot you’re dealing with.

Your friend,
krddurham – wtvd11 forum

>>> Dr. skate!! “Come get some!” You know where to find me.

Anonymous said...

Someone guessed on ctv that skatemd isn't a doctor but rather someone who skates in Maryland. That kind of made sense. But check out the post immediately before yours. It references a skatemd website. I checked out the website. It's for, like, paranormal stuff. Wierd. Anyway, agree with your assessment of skatemd but curious how you concluded the anonymous poster was skatemd?


Anonymous said...

Greg - If you'll peek at the WTVD11 forum, you'll notice that parts of the above posts appear repeated word for word in posts by skatemd.

Anonymous said...

Well, that makes all the sense in the world, then. Did you check out the website? Wierd. I'm just not a paranormal kinda guy. -- Greg

Anonymous said...


There is someone who goes by the screen name skatemd on some sort of figure skating forum. Same person? I’m not sure. But I’m almost certain (about 90% certain...100% if this person has a mustache) that the anonymous poster here, who is anti-ABN, is skatemd. My first tip-off was his/her/its excessive use of double hyphens (--). Once I noticed that, I compared the posts to some of skatemd’s posts on the wtvd11 forum. And whatd’ya know…the similarities are painfully obvious.

Here are the similarities (just to name a few)…


“this a is a total sham and fraud--just like that phony drunk Cheek you tried to run!”


“…Cheek hurt the Monks effort and is a sham and a fraud…”



“everyone in Durham knows his main backer is Dan Hill--Hill was even quoted in the newspaper as being the main draftee and person in charge of finances for Cheek and everyone knows Hill is a local millionaire and a member of the IRON DUKE booster club.”


“Cheek's main supporter and drafter, Dan Hill, is a local millionaire business man who is known for his Iron duke booster club activities and he was the main fundraiser behind this effort and he admitted as such in the local news stories about Cheek's bid.”

(Both have some sort of infatuation with Dan Hill.)


“…pursue a vendetta againist Nifong.”


“…continue the vendetta againist Nifong.”

(Coincidence that “against” is spelled incorrectly in the same phrase…I think not.)

I’m confident in my assessment because I have proved this poster wrong many times on the wtvd11 forum. I’m familiar with his/her/its writing style…the anonymous anti-ABN poster on here is skatemd.

So, what do you think of my analysis?


krddurham – wtvd11 forum

btw, I did notice the “” link above my original post, but I can not access it. What’s the url? If skate is into “paranormal stuff” this may explain a lot.

Anonymous said...

Paranormal Network Message Boards
A message board to discuss anything paranormal and spiritual.

Anonymous said...

WHOA!! That sight IS weird. The only connection that I see, between skatemd the person and skatemd the website, is that they both believe in things that are figments of their imagination.


Anonymous said...

Now wait just a darn minute.

Skate vehemently denies posting on LieStoppers.

And anyone that has spent any time on CTV knows that Skate never fibs. Just ask boardom. boardom documented numerous Skate (nonfib??) fibs.

Skate, where are you?? Are you here buddy??

Anonymous said...

Verifying a sighting is even easier than the above. If someone is trashing Lewis Cheeks (and if it isn't Barry Saunders) then it's sure to be the skatester.

Anonymous said...

News Flash

Durham Police Chief announced today that specimens of DNA taken from the AV parents' home in the in the Duke Lacrosse case have been identified with 100% certainty as belonging to the AV.

Truly amazing!