Sit Down With Dick
.
“I have had lawyers look at the original ad and ambiguity of the language could be made, in a court of law, to seem as if we are saying things against the lacrosse team.” - Group of 88's Cathy Davidson, January 8, 2007
.
KC Johnson, Durham in Wonderland
.
."I don't know if any faculty really felt any liability. But in a very litigious society, anyone can sue for anything." - Group of 88's Paula McClain, June 19, 2007
.
5 comments:
Carolyn says:
So, Paula - innocent students who defend themselves against your hate-filled ad are LITIGIOUS? Players who point out that your bigotry contributed to the death of their beloved grandfather are LITIGIOUS? Lawyers who cite your hate for poisoning a jury pool so badly that a fair trial can't be held anywhere near your venomous presence are LITIGIOUS?
Trust a badly educated doofus like you to completely misread Shakespeare. The reason the characters in his play wanted to kill all the lawyers was because they themselves were guilty and litigation would have made them pay for that guilt.
It won't work for you to smear others as 'litigious', Paula. The far, far worse name you have smeared yourself with has a stench that "all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten".
LOL Room 135! That's Lubiano's office! I guess Victoria Peterson is finally going to get rid of those leftovers!
Seriously, Duke should be ashamed for having these Profs at their University. To think this was over an incident that NEVER HAPPENED!
When will we really hear what the 88 were doing to forment racial unrest?
I am glad the families received their settlement, but the fact that these bigots on the Duke faculty get off makes me furious!
The Hope Franklin Center was opened in part to foster racial harmony but a handful of activist profs have done just the opposite. The Duke Alumni must investigate what actually happened and how they used their grad students to go on nation tv and spread false stories of racism at Duke.
Are they going to get away with it? It is clear Brodhead is afraid of saying or doing anything to remove the trouble makers.
Why would members of the Duke faculty need to be shielded from anything? It is just not to be believed that they would be in any way held accountable for their actions. To paraphrase Mike Nifong why would innocent parties need the help of lawyers. Why, if they were not guilty, would they need to be included in a legal agreement drawn up by lawyers?
Nancy, Nancy, Nancy, graceless
"Lawsuit Against CNN, Grace in Florida Missing Boy Case to Be Tried Federal Court, Judge Rules
OCALA, Fla. (AP) -- A judge has ruled that a wrongful death lawsuit claiming that CNN's Nancy Grace pushed the mother of a missing toddler to suicide through aggressive questioning on her show will be tried in federal court.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones ruled Monday that federal court would handle the lawsuit filed by Melinda Duckett's relatives because the involved parties are from different jurisdictions, according to court documents.
The lawsuit was filed in November 2006 and names the talk show host and CNN as defendants.
Grace grilled Duckett on Grace's CNN Headline News show in September 2006 about the disappearance of Duckett's 2-year-old son, Trenton. Duckett fatally shot herself before the network aired the pre-taped interview.
Authorities, who have said they believe Trenton is still alive, have named Melinda Duckett as the prime suspect in his disappearance.
Attorneys involved in the case did not return phone messages left at their offices Tuesday."
Post a Comment