WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT IT?


I’m not exactly defending Senator Barack Obama, but I found this comment by Rev. Jesse Jackson, notorious race-baiting hustler, to be more than a little offensive:

Jackson sharply criticized presidential hopeful and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama for “acting like he’s white” in what Jackson said has been a tepid response to six black juveniles’ arrest on attempted-murder charges in Jena, La. Jackson, who also lives in Illinois, endorsed Obama in March, according to The Associated Press.

“If I were a candidate, I’d be all over Jena,” Jackson said after an hour-long speech at Columbia’s historically black Benedict College.

Maybe that’s why, you corrupt cretin, Senator Obama is in the Senate and you, Rev. Jackson, are NOT. Criminals are criminals and the color of their skin doesn’t change one whit the degree of their guilt. If the positions had been reversed and the person beaten was black and the 6 people doing the beating were white – I’d be JUST AS OUTRAGED.

And while we’re on the subject, Rev. Jackson, not ONE WORD of apology has emanated from your despicable and dishonest mouth since the Attorney General of the State of North Carolina unequivocally stated that the three indicted Duke lacrosse players were INNOCENT and that NO CRIME HAD OCCURRED. You were really anxious to grab as much “face time” for yourself as you could when disbarred District Attorney Nifong was using race-baiting to win election to office. Now that he has been completely discredited, you are missing in action from that situation!

If "acting white" means that the person isn't acting like YOU, Rev. Jackson, then my applause definitely goes to Senator Barack Obama! He's showing something you lack in its entirety: class.

I THINK IT'S A FAIR QUESTION!

From The Drudge Report:

IMUS: 'WHEN WILL SHARPTON APOLOGIZE TO DUKE PLAYERS'?

Thu Apr 12 2007 10:02:02 ET

Patrick Gavin with FISHBOWLDC reports on Imus's radio show this am... Barely 12 hours after being fired from MSNBC...6:12 AM: On Imus' radio program (no longer simulcast on MSNBC) this morning, Chris Carlin, who covers sports for the program, discussed yesterday's dismissal of charges against the Duke lacrosse players. (rough transcript)

DON IMUS: When will Al Sharpton be apologizing to them?

Well, Al, when WILL you be apologizing? When will Jesse Jackson be apologizing? When will Professor Joyner and the Group of 88 be apologizing?

Unless you look good in blue, don't hold your breath.

SOME PEOPLE JUST DON’T “GET IT”, DO THEY?

In the wake of the Attorney General of North Carolina's unequivocal statement today that the three Duke lacrosse players are absolutely INNOCENT, it has already become clear that some people cannot let loose of their agendas long enough to deal with reality. Hence these quotes from the News Observer:

"I hope people who experience sexual violence in any form feel comfortable calling for help ... and know that each case is different, and they can seek help when they've been violated. There's a possibility that the way the media handles high-profile sexual assault cases, and the fear that would happen to any survivor who comes forward, can have a chilling effect and make them reluctant to step forward." — Margaret Barrett, executive director, Orange County Rape Crisis Center in Chapel Hill.

What pious, unadulterated horse manure, Ms. Barrett. Crystal’s false allegations will make it more difficult for any survivor. But hopefully, today's resolution of this case should make it more difficult for LYING ACCUSERS to sully the names of innocent people.

"We respect the integrity of the Attorney General’s investigation and supported the involvement of special prosecutors. If his office believes the state lacks sufficient evidence to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that all the elements of each crime took place, then it is the state’s constitutional duty to dismiss the charges. ... Now, as we have repeatedly said, comes the hard part. How do we proceed toward the healing places in our communities and our hearts? Long after the television vans with their saucer antennas have pulled out of Durham, long after the bloggers have grown weary from typing, those of us who believe in freedom and justice can not rest. How do we work to ensure that the final decisions in this case in no way deter women of color from making claims of violations against them which violate their spirits and their bodies?" — statement from William J. Barber II, president of the North Carolina NAACP

Blah, blah, blah, blah! Barber, you are pretentious boob! The Attorney General didn’t say that the state “lacks sufficient evidence” – he SAID the three young men were INNOCENT and he said that he had considered filing charges against Crystal Gail Magnum. And I notice that you felt that bloggers needed to be brought into your statement? Are you distressed that Nifong’s railroad job caught the attention of some intelligent and eloquent people out in the blogsphere (La Shawn Barber and KC Johnson come to mind immediately, as well as John in Carolina and Liestoppers) who held the State’s feet to the fire until the right thing was done!? So sorry that justice is color blind, sir.

Finally, one voice of common sense and rational thinking processes:

"It confirms that there is a very great deal of damage that an official like a district attorney is capable of doing if they don't exercise their authority properly." — Paul Haagen, a Duke law professor and chairman of Duke's Academic Council.

Clearly, in some itty bitty, subpar minds, even though the three Duke lacrosse players have been declared INNOCENT (Cooper didn’t say “not enough evidence” he said INNOCENT you pusillanimous pipsqueaks), “something must have happened”. Yes, something happened. Crystal Gail Magnum lied, for whatever reason, and three young men’s lives were blasted all to hell! THAT is what happened.

DUKE LACROSSE DEBACLE - CHARGES

EXPECTED TO BE DROPPED TODAY

The key players and their families (Reade, Evans and Seligmann) are gathering in Durham as we speak. Rumors are swirling that ALL the charges against these players will be officially dropped as of this afternoon.

Next question: When will the lawsuits of the families of these three innocent young men be filed and against whom? There is no lack of candidates for the honor of answering for the hell through which these three families have been put by Nifong, the Durham police department, Brodhead, Duke University, the Gang of 88 and most especially, the accuser, one Crystal Gail Mangum. My suggestion? Sue the bastards - ALL OF THEM!

UPDATE:

ALL the charges have been dropped as of 2:35 p.m. Following comments include my emphasis:

Statement from North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper on the Duke University lacrosse rape case.

"Good afternoon, everyone.

On Jan. 13 of this year, I accepted the request of the Durham district attorney to take over three Durham cases. At the time, I promised a fresh and thorough review of the facts and a decision on the best way to proceed. I also said that we would have our eyes wide open to the evidence, but that we would have blinders on for all other distractions. We've done all of these things.

During the past 12 weeks, our lawyers and investigators have reviewed the remaining allegations of sexual assault and kidnapping that resulted from a party on March 13, 2006, in Durham, N.C.

We have carefully reviewed the evidence collected by the Durham County prosecutor's office and the Durham Police Department. We have also conducted our own interviews and evidence gathering. Our attorneys and SBI (State Bureau of Investigation) agents have interviewed numerous people who were at the party, DNA and other experts, the Durham County district attorney, Durham police officers, defense attorneys and the accusing witness on several occasions. We have reviewed statements given over the past year, photographs, records and other evidence.

The result of our review and investigation shows clearly that there is insufficient evidence to proceed on any of the charges. Today we are filing notices of dismissal for all charges against Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans.

The result is that these cases are over, and no more criminal proceedings will occur.

We believe that these cases were the result of a tragic rush to accuse and a failure to verify serious allegations. Based on the significant inconsistencies between the evidence and the various accounts given by the accusing witness, we believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges.

We approached this case with the understanding that rape and sexual assault victims often have some inconsistencies in their accounts of a traumatic event. However, in this case, the inconsistencies were so significant and so contrary to the evidence that we have no credible evidence that an attack occurred in that house that night.

The prosecuting witness in this case responded to questions and offered information. She did want to move forward with the prosecution. However, the contradictions in her many versions of what occurred and the conflicts between what she said occurred and other evidence, like photographs and phone records, could not be rectified.

Our investigation shows that:
The eyewitness identification procedures were faulty and unreliable.
No DNA confirms the accuser's story.
No other witness confirms her story.
Other evidence contradicts her story.
She contradicts herself.

Next week, we'll be providing a written summary of the important factual findings and some of the specific contradictions that have led us to the conclusion that no attack occurred.

In this case, with the weight of the state behind him, the Durham district attorney pushed forward unchecked. There were many points in the case where caution would have served justice better than bravado. And in the rush to condemn, a community and a state lost the ability to see clearly. Regardless of the reasons this case was pushed forward, the result was wrong. Today, we need to learn from this and keep it from happening again to anybody.

Now, we have good district attorneys in North Carolina who are both tough and fair. And we need these forceful, independent prosecutors to put criminals away and protect the public. But we also need checks and balances to protect the innocent. This case shows the enormous consequences of overreaching by a prosecutor. What has been learned here is that the internal checks on a criminal charge—sworn statements, reasonable grounds, proper suspect photo lineups, accurate and fair discovery—all are critically important.

Therefore, I propose a law that the North Carolina Supreme Court have the authority to remove a case from a prosecutor in limited circumstances. This would give the courts a new tool to deal with a prosecutor who needs to step away from a case where justice demands.

I want to thank everyone in the North Carolina Department of Justice. I want to thank our investigators, our SBI agents and especially attorneys Jim Coman and Mary Winstead for their hard work in this matter.

I'll take some of your questions now. "

THE DON IMUS APOLOGY TOUR

By apologizing on Rev. Al Sharpton’s show? Give me a break!

The LAST PERSON who should be receiving apologies from anyone is Al Sharpton. Can we spell Tawana Brawley? In my opinion, just like the Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sharpton is black strictly for business purposes. And when it suits their purposes, I think that both Sharpton and Jackson will shamelessly exploit a situation, especially if there’s a buck to be made. I am amazed that neither of them has been hustling all around Durham, NC since March of 2006, trying to make a personal profit from the shameless persecution of the three Duke lacrosse players for the non-rape of a lying, fraudulent non-victim, all at the hands of a political hustler, ethics-challenged district attorney. Is it possible that even Sharpton and Jackson have standards?

What Don Imus said was offensive and completely indefensible. Why the outrage now? He says things like that nearly every day! But as long as he was making MSNBC and CBS money, and not drawing a whole lot of attention to his despicable comments, both networks were delighted to take the money and run. I have tried to watch his morning show – I find it thoroughly incomprehensible.

Here’s my view. If you are in the public eye, like Don Imus, or a Michael Richards, or even that lunatic Rosie O’Donnell, you ought to have the balls to own what you say without apology. If it offends someone – so what? If it makes you look like an idiot, then maybe you ought to just admit that you ARE an idiot. If it makes you look insane and demented, then Rosie it’s time to enter a treatment facility.

I’m sorry – nowhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights is there a right to “not be offended” or not have your little feelings hurt. There’s too damn much political correctness and pussyfooting in America today and we’d all be better off if there was more plain speech and less “nuance” being employed.

We’d also all be a lot better off if the Reverends Sharpton and Jackson reserved some of their ire and vocal chastisements for the various “rap elite” like Snoop Doggie Dog, Ludacris and others of that ilk whose lyrics glorify violence toward women, rape, murder (particularly of policemen) and all manner of violent and anti-social behavior, most especially including a total lack of respect for women, black or white. If there is to be civility on earth, gentlemen, let it start with YOU. But then, there’s no profit in that, is there?

NBC, MSNBC, CBS – keep Imus or fire him. I don’t really give a rat’s eardrum. But if you keep him and start expecting him to be more respectful or politically correct (1) don’t be surprised if he wanders off the reservation sooner rather than later and (2) you’d best be expecting the same kind of politically correct locutions from everyone else on your network INCLUDING demonstrably brain dead Keith Olbermann and the dumb yet strangely opinionated Chrissy Matthews.

DURHAM PERSECUTION - UPDATE!

Over the weekend, KC Johnson of Durham-in-Wonderland points to a great column from Bill Anderson, calling for reframing the central question of the case: Since, Anderson notes, “three young men, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans, have lived with these false charges for 11 months, so the question really should not be ‘When will the charges be dropped?’ Instead, it should be, ‘Why were they filed in the first place?’”

The more I thought about it, the more I realized that Anderson is absolutely right. Of course we know that blind political ambition was the probable cause of this disgraceful chapter in the history of Durham's legal system. And one has to wonder what kind of life these three innocent young men can possibly have with this as part of their curriculum vitae.

What I do not, and cannot, understand is how anyone can still be defending Mike Nifong's malicious prosecution and complete lack of prosecutorial integrity in filing and maintaining charges against three young men whose lives he has irrevocably scarred for the sake of his political survival.

DURHAM INSANITY AND NIFONG’S [multiple] EXCUSES


The amazing and magnificent Durham in Wonderland site examines Mike Nifong’s January 16 response to the Bar in all its evasions, half-truths and frightening ramifications.

For example, the assertions are described thus:

“” . . . that the Meehan report “was a summary report, which I would define as a report that states what tests were performed and either lists all positive results (i.e., those in which something is revealed) or states that there are no positive results.”

Alarmingly, the district attorney states that this type of report has “always” been the type that he has requested “in my 28+ years as a prosecutor,” that Meehan’s was “the type of report with which I have always dealt in cases involving forensic testing.” This admission begs the question of whether Nifong has engaged in games of hide-the-evidence previously.’

I have some questions about this entire appalling miscarriage of justice.

What is the State Attorney General’s office actually doing and, given the 3 indicted INNOCENT young men’s right to speedy justice, why are they taking so long?

And, since Nifong apparently IS represented by counsel, why did they let him write the January 16th letter – on office stationery no less – and why have they not acted to restrain him from offering continuing conflicting excuses for his shoddy behavior?

This case has stunk to high heaven from the very outset and it is definitely not improving with the passage of time.

NEW ETHICS CHARGES FILED AGAINST MIKE NIFONG!

The North Carolina Bar is stepping up to the plate with additional ethics charges against Mike Nifong, former prosecutor on the Duke LaCrosse case. The transcript of those charges can (already) been seen at The Smoking Gun and they make riveting reading – even if legalese makes your sphincter clench!

TRUTH, JUSTICE AND THE DURHAM WAY!

I confess to deeply felt confusion over why, in the name of all that is logical and just, the entire set of charges against the three wrongfully accused Duke lacrosse players have not been dismissed and a formal apology tendered to their parents. It has been estimated that the legal costs to the families is running in the neighborhood of $80,000 PER MONTH PER FAMILY and remember, this case has been dragging on for nearly a YEAR, with no end in sight. Part of the reason for this excessive cost, according to the enormously readable KC Johnson at the Durham-In-Wonderland site is that the defense attorneys are having to do the prosecution’s job for them in terms of actual investigation of this entire sorry non-incident. When the prosecution doesn’t even interview the complaining witness until a full NINE MONTHS after the supposed assaults occurred, that in itself is, to me, ample proof that there is no case, nor was there ever a case.

I would also commend to your attention an extraordinary column written by Joan Collins which continues the theme of the outrageous victimization of these young men, a victimization which can be seen as a hate crime committed against them BECAUSE they are white and the accuser (serial liar) is black. Let’s be very clear here, I am not disbelieving the accuser because she is black. I am disbelieving this woman because she has told multiple, conflicting and utterly non-believable stories that do not fit with the exculpatory evidence produced by the defense (ATM receipts, cell phone records, restaurant receipts, etc.) and the absence of ANY DNA of the true victims, the Duke lacrosse players under indictment and the PRESENCE of the DNA of five UNRELATED men in or on the accuser’s body or clothing the night of the supposed rape.

The accuser may not be a paragon of virtue, but if she had suffered the violence of rape, I would certainly want to see the perpetrators punished to the full extent of the law. But whatever happened that night, there is NO EVIDENCE that it involved any of the three young men whose lives are, at the moment, utterly shattered. In fact, there is convincing evidence that at least two of the young men were not even on the premises at the time that this accuser says something or other happened. But then how would the prosecutor have ever known that? He refused concrete and unmistakable exculpatory evidence offered to him by the defense from the very beginning and he NEVER attempted to interview the three young men that were subsequently charged with a crime that likely never happened and, if it did, certainly not at their hands.

The fact remains that this case is an absolute disgrace and if the parents of the three indicted-though-innocent young men do not sue the City of Durham and Duke University (whose administration’s behavior throughout has been despicable) for every cent they can get, then I will be disappointed in them.

STATE TAKES OVER DUKE/LACROSSE TEAM FIASCO!

Nifong has slithered out from under and now the State of North Carolina Attorney General's office has taken over the case.

Don't get your hopes up folks. These guys are JUST AS political as Mike Nifong and, depending on the experience and qualifications of the prosecutors chosen, could be just as inept!