Friday, December 22, 2006

Nifong The Painmaker

On the Friday before Easter, District Attorney Nifong announced that he would seek indictments the following Monday. Certainly his announcement made for an awful holiday weekend for families uncertain who would be indicted. On the Friday before Mother's Day, Nifong announced that he would seek a third indictment the Monday after the holiday. Again his words made for a tormented holiday for the families involved. Today, the Friday before Christmas, Nifong sends another holiday greeting declaring his intention to carry on and re-write the script once more. He appears intent on squeezing every last ounce of pain out of these families before he gives up.
If what appears to be well orchestrated prosecution spin is any indication, Nifong’s dismissal of the first-degree rape charges is a ploy intended to help him tiptoe around the DNA evidence and the conspiracy to withhold it from the defense. As has been the case throughout the hoax, Nifong turns to loyal enablers Duff Wilson, Victoria Peterson, and the infamous unknown person close to the investigation to make an anemic effort to portray his prosecution as one with merit.
The New York Times Duff Wilson goes to bat for Nifong by presenting comments from the co-chair of Nifong’s citizen election committee, Victoria Peterson. Curiously, or not, Wilson fails to mention her affiliation with Nifong, describing Ms. Peterson as a supporter of the accuser and a friend of the family.
“Today, one supporter of the woman, whose identity has not been revealed, said she still believes her.”
“I think when a woman has been sexually assaulted and sexually abused and she can’t explain everything, when you have had three men attacking you, I can understand if she wouldn’t know if she was raped by a penis or other item,” said Victoria Peterson, who is active in the black community in Durham and is a friend of the accuser’s family.
To help make his case, Wilson also returns to the unknown person close to the investigation.
“When she was interviewed on Thursday by an investigator from the district attorney’s office, the woman said she was penetrated from behind while she was bent over with her face toward the floor, but did not know with what, according to a person close to the investigation who would only speak on condition of anonymity.”
"With the absence of D.N.A. and her not knowing what was going on, it’s the right thing to do and it probably makes the rest of the case stronger," the source said.”
NCCU Law Professor Irving Joyner, who has been monitoring Nifong’s handling of the case for the NAACP, makes a similar effort in the News & Observer to characterize the dismissal of the charges as a strengthening of the case.
“But Irving Joyner, a professor of law at N.C. Central University, said Nifong's decision to drop the rape charges actually could strengthen the case for sexual assault and kidnapping because it will de-emphasize the importance of DNA results that failed to provide evidence of rape.
“In North Carolina, the criminal penalties for first degree rape and first degree sexual assault are the same, he said, meaning the accused men are in no less peril.
“If her [the accuser’s] testimony is that she was moved from one part of the house to another against her will and there was sexual touching, then he [Nifong] can build a case on those charges,” said Joyner, who was been monitoring the lacrosse case on behalf of the state NAACP.
While turning the liabilities of exonerating DNA evidence, and a conspiracy to withhold that evidence, into assets may have been Nifong’s intention, Professor Joyner notes that this desperate act is foolhardy at best.
“But Joyner, who said this week that Nifong should consider recusing himself from the case, said that defense attorneys probably will use the accuser’s confusion about whether she was raped to undermine her credibility in the eyes of jurors.
“The ability of the state to prove its case is going to be burdened by the inconsistent statements. No doubt about that,” Joyner said.”
In a press conference in response to Nifong’s new script for the Hoax, esteemed defense attorney Wade Smith appealed to Nifong’s humanity by asking the District Attorney to “do the honorable thing." (We won’t hold our breath on that one.) Joe Cheshire took a different tact and savaged Nifong’s attempt to again reinvent the Hoax. In graphic detail, Mr. Cheshire tore the last script apart as he listed each of the numerous times that the accuser has detailed with great description being vaginally penetrated by a penis.
In dropping the rape charges, DA Nifong notes that the accuser is now uncertain whether she was actually raped or penetrated vaginally by something other than a penis. From the NYT:
“The document said that in an interview with investigator Linwood Wilson, “the victim in this case indicated that while she initially believed that she had been vaginally penetrated by a male sex organ (penis), she cannot at this time testify with certainly that a penis was the body part that penetrated her vagina.”
“Since penetration of the vagina by a penis is one of the elements of this offense that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, and since there is no scientific or other evidence independent of the victim’s testimony that would corroborate specifically penetration by a penis, the state is unable to meet its burden of proof with respect to this offense.”
As Cheshire noted, one of the only consistencies in the various versions of the script presented by the accuser has been the use of a penis. Absent the rape charge, DA Nifong is still left with much explaining to do. Adding a new version of events to the stack of previous tales does nothing but work to further destroy the credibility of both the District Attorney and the Hoax-tress. Even if one were to believe that a person assaulted from behind may not know whether or not penetration was made by penis, other body part, or object, it does not change the fact that the accuser has claimed to be vaginally penetrated from the front as well as from behind.

"Matt then raped her vaginally from the front," she wrote in one of her
variations.

Contrary to the prosecution spin, the dismissal of the rape charges do not take the DNA evidence and the conspiracy to withhold it out of play. Even if Nifong is able to sell the local and media zealots on the idea that the accuser may have been mistaken about the rape accusation, the sexual assault charges still rest shakily on the prevarications of the accuser. This many fables all include graphic descriptions of physical and sexual contact that have been disproved by the DNA testing Nifong conspired to withhold.
Dropping the rape charges does not erase the absence of DNA from any player in or on the accuser nor does it devalue the scientific expectation that it would have been found if her tales of being raped anally and orally are to be believed. Doing away with the rape charges does not add merit to the accusers suggestion that two of her assailants ejaculated and that she had the ejaculated sperm in her mouth before spitting on to the floor near the toilet. Her description of that event was so detailed it even included the graphic note that the encounter had left her with bad breath as a result. While it may be technically easier for Nifong to make a case without the rape charges, and certainly it appears that this is his intention, it is nonsensical to suggest that the total absence of the accused’s DNA is suddenly made irrelevant.
The nonsense of it all did not, however, prevent local lunatic John Bourlon from taking up for his pal Mike. Bourlon went so far off the deep end as to predict that the falsely accused young men would now plead to the remaining charges.
Another advantage to the defense with this latest prosecution concoction is likely to be found in the support it offers for their motion to suppress the photo identifications. Uncertainty over what body part may have been used and a change to an assault only from behind will likely make it more difficult to support the notion that the identifications were anything more than a guessing game with no wrong answers.
Most importantly for the defense, however, is the apparent admission by the District Attorney, in today’s filing to drop the case, that his case is supported by no evidence other than the word of the truth challenged accuser.
As the Hoax moves along it becomes more transparent and it becomes increasingly apparent that DA Nifong’s ambition was not merely to get himself elected but also to inflict as much pain as possible along the way.

29 comments:

Anonymous said...

“But Irving Joyner...said Nifong's decision to drop the rape charges actually could strengthen the case ... because it will de-emphasize the importance of DNA results that failed to provide evidence of rape"

De-emphasizing the truth that there was NO physical contact is what this "Bar-approved" attorney and "Professor" of Law espouses !

Incredible !!

The Black Leadership in Durham is dragging the State of NC through the mud.

bill anderson said...

I agree with the assessment of this post. Nifong is getting in his last licks, as the evidence that exonerated the young men of rape also is the same evidence they would use to fight the remaining charges.

Keep in mind that Nifong knew all of this last April, but continued to lie. I can only hope that this is his last Christmas as a DA, and maybe his last Christmas as a free man. He should go to prison, period.

Anonymous said...

The DNA still comes in with Anal and force oral sex. Meehan still goes on the stand.

Anonymous said...

Bill - caught you on the radio -It blows me away how a "caller" would waste time arguing the "boy's behaving badly" vs a COMPLETE undermining of the US System of Justice!! - Who are these people ?

On the point of "bad behavior", let that same caller tell the world how she spent her college spring break --- No one is going to suggest hiring a stipper is good form - but, anyone who takes the argument of the 'boy's behavior' needs to discuss the entire subject of "College spring break".

I guarantee - the conversation will die-off. The "pro-spring break lobby" is formidable

Anonymous said...

This section below (well written) is the key and demonstrates how stupid and naive people are (i.e. Irving Joyner), to think dismissing the rape charge throws out the exculpatory DNA evidence. As a medical researcher, I can tell you it doesn't take much to amplify DNA. I cannot believe how these lying agenda driven people will spin this garbage in the media. You seriously wanna grab these Nifong enablers and shake them and ask them "are you really this stupid" after hearing this crap. And worse than them is the idiots in the media with no scientific credentials that they themselves enable.


"Dropping the rape charges does not erase the absence of DNA from any player in or on the accuser nor does it devalue the scientific expectation that it would have been found if her tales of being raped anally and orally are to be believed. Doing away with the rape charges does not add merit to the accusers suggestion that two of her assailants ejaculated and that she had the ejaculated sperm in her mouth before spitting on to the floor near the toilet. Her description of that event was so detailed it even included the graphic note that the encounter had left her with bad breath as a result. While it may be technically easier for Nifong to make a case without the rape charges, and certainly it appears that this is his intention, it is nonsensical to suggest that the total absence of the accused’s DNA is suddenly made irrelevant."

wts said...

Today was all about Nifong showing that he could make it go away (or stay) with his pen - that's he is in power and in control - evil personified. This is narcissism at it finest.

theman said...

I told you all that you don't need DNA to prove kidnapping. DA Nifong keep going, you will put these three in jail.

Victim in Massachusetts said...

WoW Nifong messed up and the accuser must still get on that witness stand and she will get chewed up and spit out.

If I could file charges for everytime I was with someone for more than two seconds. No sex involved, than all men would be in my city would be in prison.

As a victim I hope the liar is torn a new one.

The man go back under the rock you came from.

Anonymous said...

The accuser is not claiming she wasn't raped. She's saying she doesn't know. Since she claimed rape repeatedly in the past, all of that unidentified DNA on her is still in play.

If you're going to believe any of her stories, why not believe that she was raped and that the sources of the unidentifed DNA were the rapists?

Nifong still has an enormous DNA problem.

Anonymous said...

Nifong started out trying to break Messrs. Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans, even though he is bright enough to know the accuser's story was false.

Now Nifong has been elected, but he and his case have been so discredited that he is trying to make the Three blink--that is, agree to a ceasefire.

For America's sake, I hope the Three
Insist upon achieving COMPLETE VICTORY!

They shouldn't be framed.
He must be tamed.

It's a crime, prosecutorial abuse.
Nifong should not be on the loose.

Michael J. Gaynor

bill anderson said...

Damn, Michael! This is some of the worst poetry I ever have read. I loved it, of course!!

I keep saying that they have not made the case stronger, but incredibly weaker. Of course, the case had no strength in the first place, other than the power of the state to push a lie. But the case never was rooted in truth.

The previous posters are correct. The DNA still is in play, stupid Wendy Murphy and the Evil Nancy Grace notwithstanding. As I have said before, this does NOT go to trial, period, exclamation point, etc., etc.

And, yes, I am not a nice guy at times on radio shows. My wife thinks I am a nice guy, and so do my kids and violin teacher, but somewhere I have the blood of Joe Pesci in me.

Anonymous said...

A little off subject... but did anyone see PTI on ESPN tonight, they did a little piece on the LAX case but I missed it, did anyone see it.... what was their take?

Anonymous said...

I will say one thing and one thing only. If it wasn't for Liestoppers, this case would have been buried a long time ago.

Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!!!!

theman said...

irving jonier is a great lawyer and he knows the law he knos that victim was raped and he was in the room when it happpend

Anonymous said...

LOL!!!

Anonymous said...

the man has given up

Kent said...

he was in the room when it happpend

Irving Joyner raped Precious! "THEMAN" SAYS SO!!!

Jacob said...

Carnal knowledge is not an element for kidnapping. Although, I doubt a kidnapping charge will be successful.

Nifong didn't charge the proper lesser offenses to give himself a chance if the rape charge failed. I wonder how he intends to get around the consent defense.

richtes said...

theman solved it! Irving Joyner raped her.

Anonymous said...

When the man gives up you know that nobody believes anything happened except for Duff Wilson

Guy Fox said...

Michael, that poetry would make a Vogon wince, but still, good point and well said.

Jacob, I don't think the consent defense will even need to come into play. I think the credibility issues, which are immense; the prosecutorial misconduct, which at this point is undeniable; and the DNA evidence will be more than adequate to put this case out of the defendants' misery.

After that, isn't one of them the child of five generations of lawyers? I can't even fathom the number of well-qualified people he'd have available to assist in the type of lawsuit that hasn't been seen since the tobacco industry took one on the chin, and the other two have an almost equivalent level of legal firepower available, and I'm sure even more would be happy to pitch in so that they can retire.

Anonymous said...

7:53~ I saw PTI on ESPN tonight! Michael Wilbon seemed to be under the assumption that all charges were dropped. But aside from that he was all over Nifong and how he has ruined these guys. More importantly he admitted that MSM had bought into the Hoax, hook, line and sinker, and that they had to take some of the blame for fanning the flames (I remember how he and Tony were pretty outraged that the team could do this, etc.) So he seemed to accept some blame (along with the rest of the MSM, by the way, not just ESPN folks) for how they handled the story early on! Go Wilbon. I don't know who the other host was tonight (missed that--I'm sure my sons know)--Tony wasn't there.

duke2009mom

Anonymous said...

The "bearded one" was terrific. There is still no end to people willing to make fools of themselves in the case. Munson knows nothing and tells people. JOYNER statements does not do NCCU law school proud.Cash diappeared. Ted and Bernie abandoned Nifong. Lets just shoot this horse.

Anonymous said...

Those who think the case is stronger are the same people who think that when their favorite FB team is down by 3 touchdowns with 2 minutes to go and the opposing scores again...they say "now we gonna win this game cause we be gitin the ball back."

Sorry dreamers...the Duke boys have a big lead with not much time left in the game.

bill anderson said...

You are right! Where IS Cash?

Somehow, I doubt this is what he meant by the earth "shaking." And where are those people who claimed that Nifong was bringing up two eyewitnesses? It seems that the "street" in Durham does not pick up on much information.

numb numb novacaine said...

This is an excellent post. Only the finest single malt for the author. Surely one will need it to get thru another fonging holiday dramedy featuring the butcher and his butch.

May all the hoax enablers enjoy their feast of raw spinach, taco hell, leaded water, the company of superspokesit and the freshly falling dander drifting across the fields of exculpatory evidence DA tried to explain away.

Ain't enough Ho Ho Ho's in a carol to keep with all the ho's in this HOax

gs said...

Nifong saids "no comment" to bar but no to feds....

Mr. Nifong, a 28-year career prosecutor, said he had not been contacted by the Justice Department, which has been asked to intervene by a North Carolina congressman. He declined to say, though, whether any state authorities, like the State Bar Association, had contacted him.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/23/

wayne fontes said...

To Numb On Novacaine
You can't spell hoax without ho.

Anonymous said...

My head is spinning from the New York times quotes.

How about this. Nifong repeatedly said that nothing he has seen has changed his mind about the case. But, not only had he not interviewed the false accuser, he also had not looked at the documents. Wow.