Underlying Issues

In an interview with the Associated Press yesterday, interim District Attorney Mike Nifong, makes the stunning admission that he feels he has a responsibility to prosecute the Hoax, not, apparently, because doing so is his legal obligation, but rather because he seems to feel it is his societal obligation because of the “underlying divisions” revealed by the Hoax.

"I think that I have a responsibility to prosecute this case. I think that really nothing about my view of the case and my view of how the case ultimately needs to be handled has been affected by any of the things that have occurred. You can make the case go away pretty easily. Anybody could. The next D.A., or me if I were so inclined. You can do it with the stroke of a pen. But that does nothing to address the underlying divisions that have been revealed. My personal feeling is the first step to addressing those divisions is addressing this case.” Herald Sun

DA Nifong, despite the mandate of his office which requires him to pursue justice, has deemed his responsibility instead to be addressing the underlying divisions that have been revealed by the hoax. Apparently, with the hoax laid bare, Mr. Nifong has decided to spin his motives in pursuing the prosecution from an outspoken belief that an assault has occurred to a mission to address the community division revealed by the Hoax. Echoing the sentiments of the potbangers who attached their agendas to the Hoax, Mr. Nifong reveals his own. Admitting that, with “a stroke of a pen” he could end the nightmare being experienced by the innocent Duke Three and their families, if he were “so inclined,” Mr. Nifong declares his “responsibility to prosecute” this hoax is the “first step in addressing these issues.”

On the eve of the election, Mr. Nifong attempts to paint himself as a champion of the community willing to abdicate the constitutional responsibilities of his office to “refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause.” Rather than "the responsibility of a minister of justice,” Mr. Nifong pretends to have the responsibility of addressing underlying divisions. Rather than “a duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict” that “carries with it specific obligations to see that the defendant is accorded procedural justice and that guilt is decided upon the basis of sufficient evidence,” Mr. Nifong feigns that his responsibility is that of social healer.

If DA Nifong’s words are to be believed, he clearly misunderstands what his responsibilities within the criminal justice system are. If his words are sincere, he clearly has put three young men in jeopardy of decades in jail while soiling their good names, damaging their lives and causing their families to endure outrageous expense, not in the interests of criminal justice but rather in the interests of serving his own personal agenda of addressing “underlying issues.” In doing so, he has made these three young men pedestals upon which to step while giving himself the opportunity to paint himself as a man seeking to “address underlying issues.”

As misguided, unjust, and unjustified as this abuse of office would appear to be, it is difficult to imagine the Mr. Nifong truly feels his responsibility as a District Attorney is to “address underlying issues” at the expense of three innocent men. It appears far more likely that reading through his message results in finding yet another indication that Mr. Nifong’s intention is to continue to advantage himself of this opportunity, not in the interests of the “balance of Durham,” but rather for the balance of the election campaign.

On The Same Note: KC Johnson: Symbolic Justice