Wednesday, December 27, 2006

Wendy Murphy Strikes Again

In a horrible distortion of fact, that should surprise no one who was witnessed her continual disdain for truth on cable pseudo-news shows throughout the duration of the Hoax, New England School of Law professor Wendy Murphy presents a defense of District Attorney Nifong’s continual deception in an op-ed published by the USA Today.

Despite Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong’s admitted 50-plus interviews, his recent three hour interview with the New York Times, his numerous statements in pre trial hearings, his multiple motions filed with the court, his in-court responses to several defense motions, multiple statements from the accusers' family, many public and police statements by “outcry” witness Kim Roberts, multiple statements, written and oral, by police investigators and spokespersons, and the release of several statements, written and oral, by the accuser to the police, Murphy continues to put forth the false assertion that we have only heard from defense attorneys.

“For nine months, we've heard only from defense attorneys in the Duke case, and they've refused to release certain evidence.”

What certain evidence the defense has refused to release, Murphy, of course, does not specify. Murphy also ignores the fact that much, if not all, of the information put forth by the District Attorney, the pseudo-victim, and the police has proven to be false, including several statements to the court.

To continue, Murphy incredibly asserts the Nifong should be rewarded for respecting the defendants rights rather than punished for violating them. Bizarrely, Murphy contends this reward is deserved because Nifong has refrained from releasing some unknown, and non-existent by most all accounts save hers, evidence against them. Despite Nifong’s admission in his dismissal of the rape charges that he has no evidence other that the faltering word of his pseudo-victim, Murphy pretends that he might yet have something hidden in further violation of discovery statutes. Considering that he had no qualms about hinting at evidence that did not exist and leaking distortions of the scant “evidence” that did, it takes a huge stretch of imagination to believe that the DA without a conscience would, in consideration of the defendants, hold something back.

Incredibly, Murphy asserts that, in violation of discovery laws, Nifong may be withholding incriminating statements from the witnesses who have signed affidavits for the defense or photographs of an incident that never happened.

“Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong may have eyewitness statements from the defendants' friends and photos of the incident. If so, Nifong should be rewarded for respecting the defendants' rights by not leaking the type of evidence that could help him personally respond to criticism.”

As “other things to consider” in support of her position, Murphy revives the debunked rumor that the accuser declined a $2 million dollar offer to back out of the case.

“The Wilmington Journal reported last June that a cousin of the alleged victim said she'd rejected offers of $2 million from Duke alumni to back out of the case.”

Citing as her source, the Wilmington Journal, Murphy fails to note that the rumor was discredited by Durham Police investigators and the accuser. The Wilmington Journal, Murphy’s cited source, has published the details of the investigation that disproved the rumor in a follow-up to its initial presentation of the transparent claims by continually discredited cousin Jakki, yet Murphy irresponsibly chooses to ignore the absence of substantiation, and proof of falsehood, while choosing instead to perpetuate the disproved rumor.

Additional considerations, that Murphy puts forth as supportive of her argument are equally unfounded. She contends, falsely, that the police lineup was not unfair by suggesting that the exclusion of non-LAX party attendees, and in the inclusion of the two players who have since proved to have not been in attendance, makes it fair. Ignoring the fact that the procedure, which violated DPD policy and the recommendations of the NC Actual Innocence Commission, was dictated by DA Nifong as a last gasp effort to manufacture an excuse to bring charges against someone - anyone, Murphy approves.

“The photo lineup was not unfair. Not all party attendees were players, and many players were not at the party. Thus, it is false to say there were "no wrong answers" the accuser could give in making identifications.”

To continue, Murphy suggests, falsely, that DA Nifong has relied on others to interview the accuser. Considering that the accuser was not interviewed by anyone from the DA’s staff until nine months after the accusation, it is difficult to imagine that Murphy herself can even believe that he relied on “responsible others” to do what never happened until after the withholding of exonerating DNA evidence was made public. Additionally, Murphy asserts that support for Nifong is widespread yet she fails to cite a single supporter to bolster her claim.

“Nifong is criticized for not speaking to the victim about the case, but his reliance on responsible others is proper. It protects him from being removed from the case as a "witness." Many law enforcement, forensic and legal professionals support the prosecution and have not backed off despite the hype.”

As her final consideration, Murphy presents additional distortions regarding the propriety of withholding discovery and the accusers' “injuries." Suggesting that it was proper, on behalf of the accuser, for Nifong and Meehan to conspire to hold back the exonerating DNA test results, a position that neither Nifong nor Meehan has taken, Murphy implies that DNA from several men not included among the admitted consensual partners of a “victim” is protected by rape shield laws. Ignoring the fact that the rape examination detected no vaginal injuries and only diffuse edema, Murphy states otherwise while suggesting, falsely, that the judge allowed discovery of the full DNA testing results for a reason other than the demands of North Carolina discovery law.

“Everyone learned last spring that DNA in the rape kit did not match that of the defendants. Information "held back" involved other men's DNA. This constitutionally protected private information should never be disclosed unless a judge deems it relevant. The defense argued that the evidence provides an alternative explanation for the victim's vaginal injuries, and the judge agreed.”

Thankfully, the USA Today did not run Murphy’s op/ed alone but rather presented it as a counter argument to its own call for the removal of DA Nifong. That the counter argument is presented by a crackpot such as Wendy Murphy is telling, as is the fact that her postion is bolstered by the same distortions that have been used to perpetuate the Hoax from day one. When one argument is bolstered by fact and the other by distortions, it becomes quite easy to discern where the truth lies.

66 comments:

Flash said...

"This may have been a brilliant move, because with no rape charge, the victim's sexual past is irrelevant — and the cause of justice is spared a salacious and distracting sideshow."


------

It's not that "brilliant" because there is still sexual assault charges of oral and anal sex, which makes her sexual past very relevant

her "sexual past" of 72 months may be irrelevant but the previous 72 hours is very relevant since it discusses where the other DNA may have come from and also details prostituition activity

what the AV did in the previous 72 hours is indeed salacious, but it is certainly not distratcing and nor is it a sideshow...in fact, it was the opening act for this sorry production


ALSO, ***

The first line says "Opposing view: Job 1: Protect the victim"

it is "alleged victim", or else Wendy has already convicted the young men.

way to go Wendy...you are even more psychotic then ever

Anonymous said...

When Wendy Murphy is the best you can do to support your case, it is time to call it a day! The woman is a nutjob. I really don't know why anyone even includes her on any panel to ask her opinion. She is another perfect example of "DAs gone Wild"( and I am ashamed to say she is an ex DA from my state)
Also, about the lineup.... didn't the AV pick one of the LAX players that was out of town in one of her earlier "pin the tail on the player" sessions?

Anonymous said...

DNA is still in because of the forced oral sex and the spitting out of "resulting fluid".

Anonymous said...

It's irresponsible of the USA Today to give Wendy Murphy a forum to discuss this case.

She has been proved wrong time after time in this case and she's demonstrated bad judgement in her assessments and predictions in this case.

She predicted this case would be over May 15th - over as in the Boys would be exposed as guilty and there would be no debate or defense.

For months, she cried of a brutal attack with a broomstick and the resulting injuries when the search warrants for the case where public and it was clear to all that could read that the Police were NOT interested in a broom - nor did they confiscate one. In all Nifong's interviews, he told of robbery, of strangulations, of broken fingernails, verbal exchanges, etc., but he never mentioned a broom or anything remotely like it.

In fact, after motions were filed and news organizations had reviewed the discovery documents in possession of the defense, and the broom rumors were swept out to sea, Wendy took to airwaves every chance she could and spoke about the horrible, brutal broomstick attack.

I can not think of a single lawyer on TV that is more discredited than Wendy Murhpy.

.

Anonymous said...

Even Nifong agrees the material should have been turned over, my god, she is more extreme than Nifong.

Anonymous said...

So Murphy;s theory is that Nifong was right to withhold material, that he likely is and should be witholding more, as a favor to somebody, in violation of NC law, and that the line u was okay because if had fillers, but we can disregard the fact that to the extent it had fillers, the fa picked them.


Also, Murphy does not explain how there is no DNA, as though that is a sideshow.

Anonymous said...

I am so bored with supporters of the accused responding to the absurdities of Wendy Murphy and Ted Williams. We all know they are a joke. Why bother?

Anonymous said...

It is time to investigate any cases the "witch of the East" has tried as a prosecutor/persecutor. She obviously has no qualms at all in withholding exculpatory evidence against falsely accused defendants. She also apparently has no problem with making up things as she goes along. The truth means nothing to her. The only thing that is important is convicting men regardless of the evidence. It is truly scary when you view her words in light of what we have also heard from the Grace/Goslee camp. These are evil people, period.

bill anderson said...

Wendy Murphy truly is despicable, and I agree that any cases in which she has worked as a prosecutor should be investigated. I plan to write something about her and have an email into a prominent New England attorney to get more information.

But I think we also need to realize that Wendy Murphy is the face of prosecutors that will be coming out of New England. There is so much one can write about her and her allies, but just let me say that we constantly need to be vigilant against her and her ilk.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your comments Bill. The most important thing that can be done is shine the light of truth on these rats. Truth is their worst enemy. Reasonable minds, even if they have sat under the indoctrination of those of her ilk, will question her positions when presented with the truth. Unreasonable minds will turn a blind eye to the truth as we have seen in the Lacrosse case.

Anonymous said...

Wendy Murphy's comments are absurd! She evidently thinks that her "status" as an "advocate" entitles her to gloss over rigorous preparation, and rely strictly on inuendo and implication. She's a fraud hiding behind her politically correct victims rights cloak . . . it's frightening to think that she ever prosected anyone.

Caught her act? She's so shrill, disagreable,and over-the-top that we should be glad she's on the other side.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure the reason the paper gives Murphy a platform is that the paper's editors wanted SOMEone to give the other side and she's the only person stupid enough to oblige.

It's actually good for the defense that the only people still willing to speak up for Nifong are absolute whackos. Imagine if someone of KC Johnson's ability was still trying to prop up the persecution?

The more Murphy speaks out the weaker the DA's case appears. Thanks, Wendy, for making our case for us!

Anonymous said...

If Murphy truly did work as a prosecutor at one time, somebody needs to take a closer look at every sexual offense she prosecuted. She has a Soviet, show trial concept of 'due process.' And the only way I can imagine her being associated with a university is if the university has a hospital with a psych ward.

Anonymous said...

Mother of good God this woman is a crack whore. My guess is her husband left her for another man--that's why she hates all men. Because I don't know anyone, with the exception of Nancy Grace (and as much as I hate her, as least she isn't like COMPLETELY off the deep end) who is this outright psychotic. She completely distorts and ignores all the most important facts of the case and covers them over with like, pseudo facts and theories. There is not one shred of truth to any of the out of control things she said in that article. Does she really not find it ridiculous that suddenly the accuser "can't remember if she was raped" or not? Like, does that often happen in a rape case? Seriously now, I don't understand. I have to wonder if she is fighting so visciously for Nifong's very obvious violations of the law, how many she violated in her day. I definitely think her past prosecutions should come into call.

Somehow, I wouldn't be surprised if every person she prosecuted was a man who either a.)left his wife b.) cheated on his wife or c.) was an avid bachelor.

Wow...just. wow.

Anonymous said...

The woman's a nitwit, and she proves it every time she opens her mouth.

The Dude said...

This murphy is truely a clown. Who the hell would want her teaching law? She has no idea about the concepts of evidence, discovery, procedure, etc.. She was a Prosecutor, Where? Please check her records. She is a total moron and people are laughing at her as she speaks. What she "adds" doesn't even make sense let alone constitute good legal advice. Maybe she is trying for the job of Nifong's attorney in the civil matter. She can get her name on a RECORD JUDGEMENT against Nifong, Duke, Durham, Police, Pros., etc...

For her to suggest that the Defense has withheld evidence is totally absurd. They have no obligation to turn over anything until Nifong actually provides his discovery and provides his theory of the case. He hasn't given a timeline. He hasn't questioned the victim. He hasn't released the DNA reports in full. What else does this murphy lady think should be provided???

Nifong never provided the elements of the crime. he should not have gotten an indictment but N.C. doesn't keep transcripts. In either event, nifong had to make some type of claim to get a true bill. Since there is no evidence whatsoever of any crime, he had to make up the claim. It could not have been the AV's word. He hasn't spoken to her yet and neither did anyone from his office until the other day. nifong is not very smart. He is not an adequate DA. Perhaps he learned his version of the law from Murphy or one of her moron clones.

Anonymous said...

I am always astounded at this stupid woman. I definitely would like to know where she prosecuted cases and where she teaches law. I think it's very irresponsible for any news media to publish her lies.
I remember she blew off the mustache on Evans by saying it was a "shadow." Isn't there something we can do about this foof?

Anonymous said...

Now I know who they named Murphy's Law after.

bill anderson said...

She is adjunct faculty at the New England School of Law:

http://www.nesl.edu/

These people need a reminder from some folks as to the character of their faculty. Also, if faculty members are openly calling for removal of all constitutional protections, then perhaps the Bar Association of Massachusetts would be interested, as well as the American Bar Association.

We need to start putting pressure on these cartels -- I mean institutions -- to start living up to their spoken ideals.

Anonymous said...

Now I get it! She's from Boston! She must be a redsox fan! It explains everything ;)

Anonymous said...

9:48
I agree Wendy M. is about the only Lawyer out there who would support Nifong. As a lawyer she is writing rumors of a payoff without proof? And she is a law professor?

Anonymous said...

Is there any video or trascript of her on the ORF?

Anonymous said...

Below is the contact info. I found on the New Eng. School of Law website. I am going to write and let them know what an idiot they have teaching there.
Sandy Goldsmith
Director of Public Relations and Publications at New England School of Law
sgoldsmi@nesl.edu
617-422-7203

Anonymous said...

HEY 11:55.... leave the Red Sox out of this!!!!! The only "monster" I like to associate with the Red Sox is the Green Monster! (AKA the Green "Monstah"

Anonymous said...

did anyone find it simply amazing that wendy murphy considered the dropping of rape charges a "brilliant move"? i e-mailed her and stated that it was not the duty of the DA to make brilliant move, his or her job is to seek the truth and protect justice..

Anonymous said...

12:45--only messing. I had to take the opportunity to get a sox joke in their somewhere ;).

Yeah, she doesn't see a lawyer's job as justice, she see's it as "winning at all costs"--just like nifong. To her, the case is a game, and the only thing to do is win, regardless of how.

ARG I hate her

Anonymous said...

Wendy, Wendy, Wendy - There are no vaginal or rectal injuries. No one ripped her vagina. A broomstick handle - or any hard/sharp object would have required hours of surgery and weeks of rehab. She still does not get her lies do not work anymore.

theman said...

Wendy Murphy is a well respected at one of the best law schools in the country. Why does everyone demean her? The same goes for Georgia Goslee, a top notch lawyer in her own right. Maybe they know something no one here knows?

Anonymous said...

We all know here that she is an irresponsible nutjob for spouting this nonsense but what about the general public who only catches headlines on this case. They don't know that what she is saying is false. It's enough to make me puke!

Anonymous said...

The Defendants have not provided discovery?!!? She's shifting the burden of proof in her argument. Defendants do not have to prove their innocense, the State has to prove their GUILT.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the difference in these sorts of cases when one deals with blind zealot man-haters like Wendy Murphy.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

Wendy is killing her tv career. Viewers are seeing how bias she is agianst men.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you, 1:45. Murphy has taken positions that are so extreme, and has supported those positions with arguments that are both absurd and factually and legally inaccurate, that no intelligent person will ever again take anything she says seriously. She is making herself, and the N.E. law school (which is, of course, not a top tier school) look extremely foolish.

don t. said...

Who the hell is Windy Murphy???

Is Windy a name or a description?

Victim in Massachusetts said...

3:38 her name is Wendy Murphy. She is a facist, feminist, lawyer from my home state. I am ashamed to say that. She also likes to bad mouth Collin, David, Reade and the entire Duke Mens Lax team.

Thank god she is on the other end of the state than me.

Howard said...

Can't everyone leave poor Nifong alone? Hasn't he suffered enough already?

Anonymous said...

Wendy just hates men in period. She is a walking, talking hate machine spewing garbage and lies. A very ugly person inside and out.

Anonymous said...

Georgia Goslee, Ted Williams, Nancy Grace and Wendy all are of the same cloth.....idiots. Not even worth the time of day. Educated in law? I think not. Educated in the Constitution. I think not. Lets move on.

theman said...

to 4:59, you can't say that all four are absolutely wrong, you have to take them as a whole.

WJD said...

don't said, who is Windy Murphy. Maybe by mere coincidence he got her real name, perhaps we should change her name to Windy from Wendy. After all she is a bag full of wind.

Anonymous said...

ok... I always kind of suspected that "theman" was pulling our chain, but now I know he is being sarcastic.
"Wendy Murphy is a well respected at one of the best law schools in the country. Why does everyone demean her? The same goes for Georgia Goslee, a top notch lawyer in her own right. Maybe they know something no one here knows?"

Wendy and Georgia "well respected" that is a stretch but New England Law school "one of the best in the country" that is outrageous....

Cedarford said...

theman is just a smartass, taking pleasure in seeing of any poster here is too stupid to realize they are being manipulated by a person playing the troll game.

Regretfully, some posters are too stupid to realize that theman is in no way involved with expressing any personal belief or opinion on the Duke rape. He is just trolling for those suckers with bait.

My read? A cynical little Leftie who fancies himself of high intelligence who now regularly patrols blogs devoted to the Case to see how many people will respond to his bait and con game.

I've said it in a couple other Blogs....ignore him. He's trolling for gullible newbies.

Anonymous said...

Does "Windy" have a law firm? If so, is it possible that she is actually a phoney ambulance chasing bottom feeder looking for equally unethical clients to seek big buck ripoffs for her and her firm?

justice58 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

My sister was raped three years ago Justice, at age 22. She was raped. Legitimately, honestly raped. And the man who raped her is in jail now. And by way of what my sister and my entire family went through, this woman is NOT a rape victim. She is very clearly using a very serious allegation to save herself from some sort of penalties. So please spare me the " if someone you knew was raped you'd act the same" bit. My sister was raped, and my family did not railroad several innocent men and their families, nor would I EVER have a woman as disgusting, loud mouthed, obnoxious, uneducated and misinformed as Wendy Murphy represent my case. You speak of people distorting the facts--wendy murphy's entire op-ed is a distortion of the facts and blatent lies.

How dare you defend women who lie about such an atrocious situation. Clearly you have never been raped yourself, nor known anyone who has been. Had you been in a situation even close to my sister's, you would be ablet o see without doubt that this woman is taking advantage of a very serious allegation, and nothing more than a liar. She does women like my sister, brave women who are not lying, who come forward and face their actual attackers no justice. She is a lying pig, and as far as I am concerned, no better than a rapist herself.

It is sad that you defend women like this, Justice58. It shows your true colors and racist agenda.

Anonymous said...

And to add to my above post, my sister was no involed with any man until last year--she was absolutely too traumatized to begin a relationship that could lead anywhere close to physical or intimate for at least a year and a half. This woman was not only stripping on a pole less than two weeks after her alleged "attack", but having sex with a man well enough to get pregnant. This is not how victims of rape act. They absolutely do not put themselves back in a similar position to which they had to endure, especially only days after the attack. This was the nail in the coffin for me when I heard about it. I knew there was no way a legitimate rape victim would "get back on the horse", so to speak, so quickly after such a violent and intrusive attack--this woman is a cold hearted liar, a scam artist, and a race provoker. She deserves the same sentence a rapist would get.

Victim in Massachusetts said...

7:56 I agree with everything you have just said. As a victim myself I still relive that night.

When I heard that she had changed her story five or six times within a few days was when I knew she was lying and then Nifong started going to the press.

Crystal Gail was only thinking of her own self interest and not what she is doing to all trur rape victims. She and Nifong both need to be to prison for a very long time.

justice58 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

oh justice58... how very nice to hear from you again! Your sassy repartee and brilliant insight was missed.
I have been thinking about Mike Nifong, I think he probably has a career waiting for him at the New England School of Law!

justice58 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
theman said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Crystal... Crystal ... Crystal I am going to email the picture of her that is posted on the Crystal Meth site to EVERYONE I know... just because I CAN! And justice58 even though you say you don't give a damn I think you do, and that brings me a little extra joy..

Anonymous said...

justice58

All of the boards a posting Crystal's name. No one believes her.

justice58 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

justice58.. coming from a classy gal like you I take that as a compliment!

Anonymous said...

Justice58 and theman.... remember that profanity is the weapon of the witless!

Anonymous said...

Everyone should go to CNN.com and then to the Nancy Grace page, her poll is about dropping the rape charges-- go and vote and let her know how you feel

Guy Fox said...

Howard, I'm sorry, but Nifong's suffering is only beginning unless he has a LOT of favors to call in with the NC State Bar and the DOJ.

Justice, Bill isn't acting as though the Duke 3 are saints. He's acting as though they are innocent men falsely accused of a crime, and he's doing that based on the evidence. Guess what? He's right. There's a racist involved in your discussion with Bill. To find the racist, look in a mirror. The only reason Vim is printing her name is because the accuser of the Duke 3 is not a victim and her name has been in the public domain for months now. You are truly pathetic. You cry "racism" when your own arguments are shredded by the evidence. I cannot speak for anyone other than myself, but I do respect some black women. One I even love like she's a second mother or a favored aunt (and no, my real mom isn't a lesbian). I just don't respect the accuser, a woman (but certainly no LADY) who happens to be black.

Anonymous said...

I am a female, but women need to be aware of their surrounding, who they are with and what is going on - also excessive drinking does not help their cause. As Ann Coulter said " Not being drunk on a street alone at 2:00AM will greatly reduce your chances of being raped."

Anonymous said...

I would never blame a true victim for being raped. It shouldn't matter what a woman wears or where she goes or even if she is a stripper BUT this woman simply was not raped. I know it is hard for those uber-feminists to believe that a woman would lie about a sexual assault, but it does happen, hopefully not often, but it does happen. This is one of those times. All of the accusers supporters should stop wasting their time trying to defend this liar and go find real victims, there are plenty of them around in women's shelters.

justice58 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Justice58 - you'd look less like a fool if you stuck to defending real victims, not frauds.

justice58 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
justice58 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

http://www.wilmingtonstar.com

An editorial in the Wilmingtonstar is asking for Nifong to resign.

Anonymous said...

Admins---thank you for blocking Justice58. She is crazzzzy

Guy Fox said...

Admins, please unblock Justice58. Justice58 is a perfect example of why this website exists, and if some are unwilling to fight that individual and their ilk on their own turf, what of the real world, where the task is to convince people of the obvious on their turf? The blocking could be reasonably construed as a sign of weakness. Besides, Justice58 is far better than any straw man.