Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / June 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

{{OT}} Nafong is disbarred

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jeff Strickland - 16 Jun 2007 23:55 GMT
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse

N.C. panel disbars Duke prosecutor
By AARON BEARD, Associated Press Writer 43 minutes ago
RALEIGH, N.C. - District Attorney Mike Nifong will be disbarred for his
disastrous prosecution of three Duke University lacrosse players falsely
accused of rape, a disciplinary committee decided Saturday. Even the veteran
prosecutor said the punishment was appropriate.
"This matter has been a fiasco. There's no doubt about it," said committee
chairman F. Lane Williamson.
Nifong sat motionless, one hand resting over his mouth, as Williamson
recounted how he engaged in dishonest and deceitful conduct. He said
Nifong's early comments about the case - which included a confident
proclamation that he wouldn't allow Durham to become known for "a bunch of
lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl" - were purposefully designed
to boost his campaign for district attorney.
"At the time he was facing a primary, and yes, he was politically naive,"
Williamson said. "But we can draw no other conclusion that those initial
statements he made were to further his political ambitions."
Nifong will not appeal the punishment, his lawyer said.
"He hopes this helps restore some of the confidence in the criminal justice
system of North Carolina," said attorney David Freedman.
"On one hand, it's very devastating. On the other hand, he's been going
through this process for a long time, so you always have some semblance of
relief when the process is over with regardless of the outcome."
The North Carolina State Bar charged Nifong with breaking several rules of
professional conduct, including lying to both the court and bar
investigators and withholding critical DNA test results from the players'
defense attorneys.
The committee, after deliberating for a little more than an hour on
Saturday, unanimously agreed with the bar on almost every charge - including
the most serious allegations - that Nifong's actions involved "dishonesty,
fraud, deceit and misrepresentation."
State Bar prosecutor Douglas Brocker told the committee that as Nifong
investigated the allegations that a stripper was raped and beaten at a March
2006 party thrown by Duke's lacrosse team, he charged "forward toward
condemnation and injustice," weaving a "web of deception that has continued
up through this hearing."
"Mr. Nifong did not act as a minister of justice, but as a minister of
injustice," Brocker said.
The verdicts and the punishment did not appear to surprise Nifong, who
acknowledged during sometimes tearful testimony Friday that he would likely
be punished for getting "carried away a little bit" when talking about the
case.
During Saturday's closing arguments, Williamson repeatedly interrupted
Nifong's attorney, Dudley Witt, as he discussed the DNA testing.
Williamson questioned why it took several months for the defense to get DNA
test results that found genetic material from several men in the accuser's
underwear and body, but none from any lacrosse player.
"It wasn't just one little oversight," Williamson said later. "This was
conduct over an extended period in a very high-profile case."
Aware of those test results, Nifong pressed ahead with the case anyway and
won indictments against Dave Evans, Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty.
State prosecutors later concluded the three players were "innocent" victims
of a rogue prosecutor's "tragic rush to accuse."
Nifong made "multiple, egregious mistakes" as he pursued the charges, but
not intentionally, his attorney said in closing statements.
"It didn't click," Witt said as he tried to explain one of his client's
errors. "His mind is just his mind. That's the way it works. It just didn't
click."
Brocker said Nifong had to have known he was making improper comments to
reporters. Nifong said he regretted some of his statements, including a
confident proclamation that he wouldn't allow Durham to become known for "a
bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl."
He also focused on when Nifong learned about the full extent of the DNA test
results and when he shared that information with the defense.
Nifong gave defense attorneys an initial report on the DNA testing in May
2006 that said private lab DNA Security Inc. had been unable to find a
conclusive match between the accuser and any lacrosse players.
But lab director Brian Meehan testified this week that he told Nifong as
early as April 10, 2006 - a week before Seligmann and Finnerty were
indicted - about the more detailed test results.
Nifong testified that when he gave the defense the initial report, he
"believed at the time that I had given them everything."
The disciplinary hearing committee had the choice of suspending Nifong's law
license or taking it away entirely.
Nifong told the panel hearing the case Friday that he would resign from his
post as Durham County district attorney over his handling of the rape
charges.
The players' attorneys have pledged to seek criminal contempt charges next
week in Durham.
witfal - 16 Jun 2007 23:58 GMT
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> falsely accused of rape, a disciplinary committee decided Saturday.
> Even the veteran prosecutor said the punishment was appropriate.

Ain't that a shame.  Would that ALL politicians experience similar fates when
pandering to those with more interest in political correctness than justice.

I'll be waiting for Jesse and Al to soapbox their support for this just
decision.
sharx35 - 17 Jun 2007 05:16 GMT
>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> I'll be waiting for Jesse and Al to soapbox their support for this just
> decision.

Interesting how you jump all over it when some criminal gets off. That would
explain your love for the terrorists and insurgents in the Middle East.
witfal - 17 Jun 2007 06:51 GMT
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> Interesting how you jump all over it when some criminal gets off. That would
> explain your love for the terrorists and insurgents in the Middle East.

???  I guess you missed the sarcasm.  I never rejoice when a criminal gets off.

Nifong got waht he deserved.  He pandered the race card to get re-elected, and
got what he deserved.

And how you ever thought I love terrorists and insurgents, I'll never know.
Jeff Strickland - 17 Jun 2007 18:27 GMT
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Interesting how you jump all over it when some criminal gets off.

???

What are you talking about? Which criminal got off?

That would
> explain your love for the terrorists and insurgents in the Middle East.
sharx35 - 17 Jun 2007 19:21 GMT
>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> What are you talking about? Which criminal got off?

Do you REALLY think that those perps were totally innocent?

Where there's smoke.....

> That would
>> explain your love for the terrorists and insurgents in the Middle East.
Jeff Strickland - 17 Jun 2007 19:32 GMT
>>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> Where there's smoke.....

Of that particular offense, yes I think they are totally innocent.

They all had rock solid proof they could not have been the perps of the
crimes alleged, and the accuser had no proof that she had actually been
accosted by those three men. The evidence seems to support that she had
sex -- willingly or not -- on the night she alleges the crimes to have been
committed, but the evidence does not support the assertion that these three
men were the perps.

Absent any other women coming out of the woodwork claiming they had been
accosted by any or all three of these guys, the only conclusion that one can
come to is that they are totally innocent.
sharx35 - 17 Jun 2007 19:36 GMT
>>>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
> accosted by any or all three of these guys, the only conclusion that one
> can come to is that they are totally innocent.

Rock, solid proof? Oh, yeah, paid witnesses???
Jeff Strickland - 17 Jun 2007 19:45 GMT
>>>>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>>>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>
> Rock, solid proof? Oh, yeah, paid witnesses???

Paid?

I don't need to debate the false charges, they have already been exposed as
such. The city and county of Durham is going to be on the hook for the legal
defense of each of these three guys because Nafong had no evidence.
witfal - 17 Jun 2007 19:58 GMT
> Paid?
>
> I don't need to debate the false charges, they have already been
> exposed as such. The city and county of Durham is going to be on the
> hook for the legal defense of each of these three guys because Nafong
> had no evidence.

The moneys paid to these three guys, who in the eyes of the law ARE
completely innocent, are going to far exceed their legal bills.  
Remember that innocent is not
the same as not guilty.

This kind of conduct on the part of a government official is
inexcusable.  After their attorneys are done, Durham is going to be
paying tens of millions of dollars to each
of them.  And I hope they collect every dime.
Scott in Florida - 17 Jun 2007 20:54 GMT
>> Paid?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>paying tens of millions of dollars to each
>of them.  And I hope they collect every dime.

Not only Durham, but Duke.

They both deserve to pay and pay and pay till it hurts....

Signature

Scott in  Florida

There ought to be one day-- just one--
when there is open season on senators.

    Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

sharx35 - 18 Jun 2007 07:04 GMT
>>> Paid?
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> They both deserve to pay and pay and pay till it hurts....

Scott, in the end it will be taxpayers money paid out.
Scott in Florida - 18 Jun 2007 13:25 GMT
>>>> Paid?
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
>Scott, in the end it will be taxpayers money paid out.

Of course, but in this case I feel it is justified.


Signature

Scott in  Florida

There ought to be one day-- just one--
when there is open season on senators.

    Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

Jeff Strickland - 18 Jun 2007 16:37 GMT
>>> Paid?
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> They both deserve to pay and pay and pay till it hurts....

I do not agree that the school has any liability here. I'd be surprised if
the school gets drug into this.
Scott in Florida - 18 Jun 2007 16:46 GMT
>>>> Paid?
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>I do not agree that the school has any liability here. I'd be surprised if
>the school gets drug into this.

The school made a LOT of comments about the boys as the case went on.

The school is liable too....imho (or as someone pointed out I don't
have 'humble' opinions...LOL)

Signature

Scott in  Florida

There ought to be one day-- just one--
when there is open season on senators.

    Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

Jeff Strickland - 19 Jun 2007 01:08 GMT
>>>>> Paid?
>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> The school is liable too....imho (or as someone pointed out I don't
> have 'humble' opinions...LOL)

Unless the school kicked the guys out, I'm not certain that anything they
might have said is cause for liability. Now, there could be certain
particular statements that are libelous, and the maker(s) of such statements
might be open to a lawsuit. And, I don't really know that the school itself
did or did not say anything, but I think that "the school" and various staff
members are not necessarily the same thing.

And, the school was going on what they were fed by Nafong. If the school was
feeding Nafong bad information, then the kids can sue, but if Nafong was
feeding bad information, I'm not sure the kids can sue everybody that
repeated it. But, we'll see ...
sharx35 - 18 Jun 2007 07:03 GMT
>> Paid?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> The moneys paid to these three guys, who in the eyes of the law ARE
> completely innocent, are going to far exceed their legal bills.

COMPLETELY innocent? What a f.cking LIEbrawl sucker YOU are. The law here is
an a.s.

> Remember that innocent is not
> the same as not guilty.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> millions of dollars to each
> of them.  And I hope they collect every dime.

You stupid f.cking idiot! WHOSE money do you think will be paid out? The
private funds of the prosecutors? THINK AGAIN. It will the TAXPAYERS funds.
I hope that they don't get a f.cking cent. In my mind, they ARE guilty.
witfal - 18 Jun 2007 15:23 GMT
>> The moneys paid to these three guys, who in the eyes of the law ARE
>> completely innocent, are going to far exceed their legal bills.
>
> COMPLETELY innocent? What a f.cking LIEbrawl sucker YOU are. The law here is
> an a.s.

I've got news for you, moron. EVERYONE is innocent until proven guilty.

Remember reading that somewhere?

>> This kind of conduct on the part of a government official is inexcusable.
>> After their attorneys are done, Durham is going to be paying tens of
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> private funds of the prosecutors? THINK AGAIN. It will the TAXPAYERS funds.
> I hope that they don't get a f.cking cent. In my mind, they ARE guilty.

In your mind?  What mind?  You've proven yourself to be nothing more than
a mouth-breeathing, knuckle-dragging cretin, willing to discard principles upon
which this nation was founded.

And you betcha it'll be taxpayers funds.  If they're stupid enough to
elect someone
like Nifong, they deserve to get fleeced.

His election was assured not by his competence, but his pandering the
race card.
He did it well, and the weak-minded are obviously still falling for his
influence.

I find it hard to believe that someone as stump-stupid as you can be a
conservative.
I'm a conservative.  A REAL one, not some defective as yourself.

Obviously we need a sub-classification for you.  "Special Needs", perhaps.
Jeff Strickland - 19 Jun 2007 01:15 GMT
>>> Paid?
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> funds. I hope that they don't get a f.cking cent. In my mind, they ARE
> guilty.

They are NOT guilty. they are more than Not guilty, they are innocent of the
charges. The crime not only was not committed by the guys that were charged,
it now appears to everybody (except you) that the crime(s) was(were) not
committed at all.

When the taxpayers go after an innocent man (or men, or women), then the
taxpayers better make damn sure that the crime was even committed. Nafong
failed to do even this. Nafong is a Public Official, he was put into office
to represent the taxpayers. He is the voice of the taxpayers, and now the
taxpayers have to pay the piper for his lies and the damage they caused. It
is really very simple. It's a bit of an inconvenient truth ...
sharx35 - 19 Jun 2007 15:00 GMT
>>>> Paid?
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> now the taxpayers have to pay the piper for his lies and the damage they
> caused. It is really very simple. It's a bit of an inconvenient truth ...

Well, cocksucker, where did YOU get YOUR law degree?
Jeff Strickland - 19 Jun 2007 15:42 GMT
>>>>> Paid?
>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>
> Well, cocksucker, where did YOU get YOUR law degree?

No need to get nasty, f.ck face. The court said that Nifong did not do his
job correctly, Nifong is a public official and he harmed three good men, it
is reasonable that the public has to make good the bad that Nifong did.
That's how it works. Dumb a.s.

Three good men have been harmed by the city and county of Druham, and there
are some that say they were also harmed by the school -- I'm not sure the
school harmed them. These three men and their families have spent nearly 2
million dollars defending themselves from the public officials of Durham,
lead by Mike Nifong.

The sad things is, there is also a woman whos interests were not protected
by the same officials, lead by the same man.
sharx35 - 19 Jun 2007 16:21 GMT
>>>>>> Paid?
>>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 50 lines]
> The sad things is, there is also a woman whos interests were not protected
> by the same officials, lead by the same man.

Three good men? Yeah, right. Betcha that private investigators could find
that they are felons, ten times over.
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute - 19 Jun 2007 16:19 GMT
> Nafong is a Public Official, he was put into office
> to represent the taxpayers.

1.  It's NIFONG.

2.  He was put into office by a scumbag, Governor Mike Easley (Sleazely).
Jeff Strickland - 19 Jun 2007 21:38 GMT
>> Nafong is a Public Official, he was put into office
>> to represent the taxpayers.
>
> 1.  It's NIFONG.

Sorry, my mistake.

> 2.  He was put into office by a scumbag, Governor Mike Easley (Sleazely).

He ran for his office on a platform that specifically said he would
prosecute the Duke Three. He may have been appointed to his initial term,
but he ran for re-election and won his office on the grounds that he would
prosecute the Duke La Crosse Players.

But, whatever. He is a public official, and he failed to do his job
properly, and he personally and in the capacity of his public office, harmed
three guys.
Jeff - 17 Jun 2007 18:56 GMT
>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> I'll be waiting for Jesse and Al to soapbox their support for this just
> decision.

Gee, we wouldn't have many politicians left. B-)

Jeff
Scott in Florida - 17 Jun 2007 19:43 GMT
>Gee, we wouldn't have many politicians left. B-)

...and the problem with that would be...............?

Signature

Scott in  Florida

There ought to be one day-- just one--
when there is open season on senators.

    Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

GO Mavs - 17 Jun 2007 02:14 GMT
hes just one of thousands who need to be sent packing...

> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse
>
[quoted text clipped - 77 lines]
> The players' attorneys have pledged to seek criminal contempt charges next
> week in Durham.
Scott in Florida - 17 Jun 2007 02:20 GMT
>hes just one of thousands who need to be sent packing...

Boy that is an understatement!


Signature

Scott in  Florida

There ought to be one day-- just one--
when there is open season on senators.

    Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

Jeff - 17 Jun 2007 18:55 GMT
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070616/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse

<...>

Good for North Caroline. The guy lied and made people's lives miserable.

Jail time would be good for him, too.

Jeff
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.