Finnerty’s DC Conviction Set Aside

The latest indication of near universal acceptance of the actual innocence of the falsely persecuted victims of Defendant Nifong’s Hoax comes from Washington, D.C., Superior Court Judge John H. Bayly Jr. Benjamin Niolet of the News & Observer reports that Collin Finnerty’s misdemeanor simple assault conviction was set aside last month by Judge Bayly, who also ended Finnerty‘s probation early.

“A Washington, D.C., judge said last month that he would wipe the simple-assault case against Collin Finnerty off his record, six days after Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong dropped the rape charge against the former Duke lacrosse player.

“Finnerty was convicted in July of misdemeanor simple assault stemming from a November 2005 incident outside a Georgetown bar. He was accused of threatening and taunting a Washington man after a night of drinking.

“On Dec. 28, D.C. Superior Court Judge John H. Bayly Jr. ended Finnerty's probation, said Leah Gurowitz, spokeswoman for the D.C. Courts.

“Finnerty's attorney moved to set aside and vacate the verdict under a district law that allows young offenders to have convictions erased. The judge said in court he would grant that motion, Gurowitz said.” Niolet, N&O

In comments to Niolet and a letter to the News and Observer, Finnerty’s attorney, Steven McCool, notes that the decision to end Finnerty’s probation and clear his record speaks well of the character of this victim of Nifong's Hoax. It also contradicts the continued attempts by many Hoax enablers and apologists to mis-characterize the Georgetown incident as a hate crime, in order to falsely impugn Mr. Finnerty and his teammates.

"Judges don't do this as a matter of course. They take a look at the person before them, and they make the appropriate judgment," said Finnerty's attorney, Steven McCool. Niolet, N&O

“As Collin Finnerty's attorney in Washington, D.C., I am disappointed, but not surprised, that a Jan. 5 People's Forum letter-writer appears to have learned nothing from the Duke lacrosse scandal. He, like many others, ignores the procedural history, the evidence and the court's findings in Finnerty's Washington matter.

“Initially, prosecutors decided to dismiss the misdemeanor charge against Finnerty in exchange for community service. The gross injustice in Durham prompted the prosecutors to withdraw from their agreement. The evidence at trial made clear that Finnerty did not strike the accuser. The proof also contradicted assertions made by others -- that this was some sort of hate crime. Neither the police nor the prosecutors ever made this assertion. In fact, the government acknowledged this "was an argument between two young guys who were sizing each other up." Notwithstanding, the court found Finnerty guilty of throwing "fake punches."

“Ironically, the court found it unnecessary to require that he perform community service as part of his probationary sentence. More importantly, last week the judge who presided over the case set aside his conviction, after monitoring Finnerty for several months and learning more about his fine character.” McCool, N&O

The letter that McCool refers to was written by Raleigh resident John Wright, who falsely describes the incident as a "physical assault" in order to deride Duke’s decision to invite Finnerty back to school.

"I would like to know why Duke University administrators feel that it is acceptable to readmit Collin Finnerty (news story, Jan. 4). Although the Durham sexual assault case against him appears to be very shaky at best, isn't it clear that he physically assaulted a man in Washington last year?

“This is a question that administrators at Duke should be pressed to answer and the media should be asking it.

“If I were a student at Duke, I would not feel comfortable about the decision to readmit Collin Finnerty.” Wright,N&O

Mr. Wright’s mischaracterization is not, however, the only, nor the most deceptive, attempt to distort the incident. Group of 88 Professor Houston Baker, Duke University Professor Thomas Crowley, Snooze Room Editor Bob Ashley, and N&O columnist Barry Saunders have each promoted the lie that the simple assault was a hate crime. The false assertions put forth by Baker, Crowley, Ashley, and Saunders came well after it was widely reported that the uninformed allegations of gay bashing were specifically refuted by federal prosecutors, police, and Jeffrey Bloxsom, the other party involved in the altercation.

"No mention was made of [Collin Finnerty’s] recent assault conviction, with strong homophobic overtones, against a gay man on a Washington, D.C. street." - Bob Ashley

"The Duke lacrosse players were no angels – they had a previously established history of rowdiness tarnished with racial comments, and one of the accused had been previously arrested for anti-gay comments while drunk." - Professor Thomas Crowley

“LIES! You are just a provacateur [sic] on a happy New Years Eve trying to get credit for a scummy bunch of white males! You know you are in search of sympathy [sic] for young white guys who beat up a gay man in Georgetown, get drunk in Durham, and lived like "a bunch of farm animals" near campus.

"I really hope whoever sent this stupid farce of an email rots in .... unhappy [sic] new year to you ... and forgive me if your really are, quite sadly, mother of a "farm animal." Professor Houston Baker

“Collin Finnerty was convicted of attacking a man he thought was gay.” Barry Saunders, N&O

The timing of Judge Bayly’s ruling, delivered within a week of Defendant Nifong’s decision to drop the rape charges after Dr. Meehan's sworn testimony about their unethical agreement to purposely withhold exculpatory evidence from the defense, is noteworthy. The judge's decision coincides with the State Bar filing ethics charges against Defendant Nifong, and the North Carolina Conference of District Attorneys calling for Nifong to recuse himself from the Hoax. The coincidence of the timing appears to indicate that the legal community has finally wised to the danger Nifong represents to the entire criminal justice system.

Also adding significance to the timing, it would appear that the clearing of Finnerty’s record starkly reveals the frivolous nature of the civil rights complaint filed by Nifong’s Citizen Committee Co-Chairs, Victoria Peterson and Kim Brummell, the day after Judge Bayly granted the motion to set aside the conviction. In their letter to the Department of Justice, the “Citizens for Mike Nifong” political action committee founders falsely described the incident as a hate crime.

“It also calls for hate crime charges to be lodged against Finnerty for his recent conviction in Washington, D.C., on charges stemming from a confrontation with a gay man.”

“Activist Victoria Peterson issued a press release announcing the complaint and said she faxed and mailed copies to the Justice Department on Friday.” Herald-Sun

There certainly appears to be much validation for Collin Finnerty, as well as further aspersions for Nifong and his enablers, in the decisions by Judge Bayly. It is equally apparent, (if the nasty entry in the Urban Dictionary is any clue), that the damage done to young Mr. Finnerty’s reputation by the false accusations, Defendant Nifong’s hijacking of the Hoax, and the smear tactics employed by Nifong’s campaign supporters, media enablers, and public apologists continue.