N.C. panel disbars Duke prosecutor

Source: AP

N.C. panel disbars Duke prosecutor

By AARON BEARD, Associated Press Writer

District Attorney Mike Nifong was disbarred Saturday for his "selfish" rape prosecution of three Duke University lacrosse players — a politically motivated act, his judges said, that he inexplicably allowed to fester for months after it was clear the defendants were innocent.

"This matter has been a fiasco. There's no doubt about it," said F. Lane Williamson, the chairman of the three-member disciplinary committee that stripped the veteran prosecutor of his state law license. Even Nifong and his attorneys supported the decision, though the veteran prosecutor refused to admit to the end that no crime occurred at a March 2006 lacrosse team party.

The committee said Nifong manipulated the investigation to boost his chances of winning his first election for Durham County district attorney. In doing so, he committed "a clear case of intentional prosecutorial misconduct" that involved "dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation."

Williamson specifically cited Nifong's comments in the early days of the case, which included a confident proclamation at a candidate forum that he wouldn't allow Durham to become known for "a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl." He also called the lacrosse team "a bunch of hooligans" at one point.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070617/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse

(A black-on-white frame is perfectly OK, of course - same as it ever was.)

...his worries. He harmed numerous people--the young men and their families, future victims of rape, and the criminal justice system itself.

Hekate

and it's just another day. But let a left leaning lawyer do it and they are all hell bent on disbarment.

The judge and the committee use phrases like "a politically motivated act", "this matter has been a fiasco" and "dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation." Doesn't this all sound just like our federal DOJ? But it's ok when repukes do it especially when they do it at the federal level.

even more than Nifong. People have been sentenced to death and nearly executed for crimes that they did not commit, because NC district attorneys literally manufactured evidence and hid exculpatory evidence.

Nifong deserved to be disbarred, but so do several other district attorneys in NC. Why isn't the state bar pursuing cases against them?

manufacturing evidence, as Nifong has been, by a panel?

Sometimes the general public believes that a thing is so, when in fact, it hasn't been proven.

Nifong's behavior was blatant and, frankly, inexplicable. His continuing to prosecute on a case where obviously there was no credible evidence defied common sense. He didn't even try to hide it, except to conceal SOME evidence. But that didn't hide the fact that there was no credible evidence on which to base charges.

I am not aware of any other case in the entire country where the D.A. has been so obviously and blatantly negligent and derelect in his duty in pursuing a non-case against people for which there was no evidence. If there are any others, they should be stripped of their licenses, as well.

There have been cases in the past where hiding evidence came to be discovered years later, and in those cases, actions were taken against the D.A. office or the police or whoever did it, that I'm aware of. Sometimes, though, those people are no longer in office.

http://www.law.duke.edu/innocencecenter/

Alan Gell and Darryl Hunt can tell you. After years under lock and key in North Carolina for crimes they did not commit, both men were recently released from prison. Mr. Gell won his freedom after nine years through acquittal in a retrial. The retrial occurred in part because vital evidence pointing to Mr. Gell’s innocence was withheld by the prosecution during his original trial. That trial led to a death sentence for Mr. Gell.

Darryl Hunt (center) won his freedom in December
2003 thanks to the efforts of a legal team that included lead attorney Mark Rabil (left) and Assistant Appellate Defender Ben Dowling-Sendor. Darryl Hunt didn’t receive a death sentence, but he did lose eighteen years of his life to the Department of Corrections before, with the help of a tireless defense team, being fully exonerated in February of 2004. Meanwhile, the real perpetrator, the man who raped and murdered the young victim, was free – to commit other crimes.

Well, maybe other prosecutors will look at Nifong and worry a little.
That's not a bad thing.

The state has all the cards on their side. Very few accused people can afford such high-powered attorneys as the lacrosse players received - partly because they had the support of other wealthy Duke alums.

A person should not have to spend millions of dollars in attorney's fees to be sure that a prosecutor isn't hiding evidence that proves their innocence - or even worse, manufacturing evidence.

Had the Duke students not have the means to hire the best legal advice money can buy - where would they have been now?

How many innocent people are rotting in jail, being executed, even, for "political expediency?"

I will never forget nor forgive then Governor Bill Clinton for "suspending" his New Hampshire campaign to run home to send a mentally challenged prisoner to his death.

He was happy to give all those interviews in the beginning, and media and public were eating it up. A year later, all that publicity finally caught up with him. Furthermore, using an argument that since bar was lenient on prosecutors in the past, they should be lenient on Nifong means no prosecutor ever could be disbarred in NC (for anything he/she does).

did contribute to an atmosphere in the state where prosecutors felt that they could do anything without repercussions.

we all knew the university and the influential mommies and daddies were coming back with a tidal wave of vengeance...the accuser will also be sued, or worse in the coming months

I am not sure what you mean by university coming back with a tidal wave of vengeance. I am actually wondering if the university itself could be sued by the accused.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

She made up horrible accusations and used the justice system to harass innocent people.

I think she needs to do a little time for that.

And if the victims had been poor, they might have ended up copping a plea and still gotten time despite her lying accusation.

When do they come after her as well?