Is this fair putting the former accuser's picture front and center

The media is saying she lied. i have a different take on this just because the charges were thrown out doesn't mean she lied what it means is she couldn't prove her case because she didn't have the high price lawyers like these guys did and she was confused about who the guys were. http://www.drudgereport.com/
DRUDGE REPORT 2007®

you do for his site.

all over campus.

Or to follow them around campus and outside the courthouse denouncing them -- on the basis of no evidence at all.

I totally agree. :thumbsup:

every version of the story she told. NC Attorney General made references to a sealed record, which has to do with this young woman making similar charges of rape when she was a teenager. Her description of her assault by the Duke players bore a striking resemblance to what she had alleged in the earlier assault.

In a fair world, she would be facing the cumulative time she was threatening these young men with.

She not only hurt these men's lives irreparably, she has hurt the credibility of other women by extension, no matter how unfair that is. The next time an entertainer or poor black woman accuses a white man of rape in Raleigh/Durham, they are going to think twice before believing her.

This woman should suffer every indignity that she sent the accused through. Nifong too.

just as they found no evidence of pursuing a case against the lacrosse players, they are also not pursuing a case against her.

so, what is she guilty of?

dp

that's what the runaway bride was charged with.

no charges against her

dp

and the sealed record (again, the mental health issue and her past claims of having been gang raped), that he didn't think it would serve justice to prosecute her.

Had I been the prosecutor, I would consider whether to file charges for filing a false police report, but I would also have to balance that against the history of this woman and the cost of prosecuting someone that needs help rather than jail. I believe this is the process that NC's AG went through.

or doubts concerning the AG's decision concerning the lacrosse players you like to share?

dp

not only he faces the threat of sanctions from the Supreme Court, which could include disbarment, but he certainly faces lengthy and costly litigation from the families of the wrongfully accused.

Normally a prosecutor is immune to civil lawsuits arising from actions taken while in office, except when there has been prosecutorial misconduct.

where they have enormous autonomy. I hope the state makes an example out of him!

the Supreme Court can remove a rogue prosecutor from a case. Currently, there is none.

They need to send a strong message that this kind of abuse of power will not be tolerated.

That the DNA found did not match any of the 46 Lacrosse players, including the defendants, even though she stated that condoms were not used.

That the accuser was not able to pick out any attackers until a third attempt -- when the police used a defective line-up procedure. She was told to pick out her attackers from photos of the 46 white lacrosse players, and also told that these were the men who attended the party. State law requires several "filler" pictures of non-involved people for every potential defendant included in a photo lineup.

That the accuser had told several different stories that contradicted each other in major aspects.

That Seligmann had an iron clad alibi that showed he wasn't in the house during the only time period the attack could have occurred.

That the other dancer's immediate reaction was that they were together for all but a few minutes, and that the charges were a "crock."

That the accuser acknowledged having at least two 22 ounce beers before the party, as well as taking a muscle relaxant -- but that no date rape drug was found in her system.

That, years before, the accuser accused 3 other men of gang rape, then decided not to pursue the charges.

That the accuser had been convicted of stealing a taxicab from a lap dance customer, and then -- while drunk-driving the taxi -- trying to run down a policeman who was on foot. (Amazingly, she got off on probation.)

That the accuser has been hospitalized for mental illness in the past.

And since last spring we have learned, among other things, that Nifong deliberately withheld exculpatory DNA evidence after telling the judge that he had turned over ALL evidence to the defense. And we have gotten at least one completely new version of the accuser's story. (Probably more, since that doesn't count any that she gave to the Attorney General.) We have also learned from the A.G. today that there was NO evidence at all that supported her stories, and much that contradicted them.

Given all that, the A.G. made the only fair decision.

I purposely didn't purpose in any of the 100 hundred DUke threads because I knew it was filled with racial and sexual landmines.

But are you saying that this woman had a history of mental issues including the claims that she had been gang-raped?

CREEDMOOR, N.C. - The exotic dancer who said she was raped by three members of the Duke men's lacrosse team made similar accusations in 1996, officials confirmed Friday.

The resurfaced case-which was never prosecuted-has put the accuser's credibility and District Attorney Mike Nifong's judgment under intensified scrutiny as Tuesday's DA primary election approaches.

The dancer-then 18 years old-told a police officer Aug. 18, 1996 in Creedmoor she had been raped by three men in June 1993, according to a police document.

The victim's father contradicted her account, telling the Raleigh News & Observer Thursday that no sexual assault had occurred.

http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/05/01/News/Dancer.Made.Prior.Allegation-1897624.shtml?norewrite200605060038&sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com

And was it public knowledge?

This info was all over the news. Here is a point to remember...

Police staff hand-searched through years of files before they found the report of the alleged 1996 rape.

Nifong said rape shield laws will prevent the previous allegations from being aired in the courtroom, but defense attorneys asserted their right to use the 1996 case to try to impeach the accuser.

"This is not evidence of prior sexual activity as the rape shield statute contemplates," Ekstrand said. "Instead it is evidence of her relationship with the truth."

I really stayed away from this story when it broke because I felt that it had all of the potential for becoming the clusterfuck that it eventually did.

I heard someone railing on the radio about how Jesse Jackson became involved in this to the point that he made a statment that he was going to pay for this young ladies college so she wouldn't have to "endure this persecution again" (His quote, not mine)

Is there any validity to that statement?

but enough information about that incident was published. If I recall, the man she fingered as the assailant was related to her. Whatever the cops found out, the fact is that no criminal charges were pursued.

But, if you're Mike Nifong, you judge none of that to be relevant.

Whether true or false.

This lying human filth tried to ruin the lives of three innocent men.

"nappy-headed ho" ?

I think it far more likely than not that she was, but I'm not confident enough that she wasn't telling the truth to condemn her, given how terrible it would be to do so if she was, and how little possible good calling her bad names will do.

is mentally ill. That she believes all the contradictory stories. All of them.

Since the charges have been found to be without basis I'd say that in this instance she no longer classifies as a sexual assault victim and shouldn't be subject to the privacy/confidentialty policies normally granted said victims.

In no way do I think she should be harassed or threatened with harm but I have no qualms with people knowing the name of the person who effectively stained the reputation of three men for some time in the future.

They can't all be the truth. How to pick?

Unfortunately for her, there wasn't any outside evidence to support any of her tales. And there was plenty of evidence to contradict them.

Any future defendant in Durham is LUCKY that these Duke students were wealthy enough to hire good attorneys. Thanks to this case, an devious DA is out on his ear.