NationStates Jolt Archive


Nifong faces Ethics violation charges

Wilgrove
25-01-2007, 22:20
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/16539857.htm
Ethics charges mount for Durham DA
Nifong withheld DNA evidence and lied about it, State Bar says
JOSEPH NEFF AND BENJAMIN NIOLET
(Raleigh) News & Observer

RALEIGH - Embattled Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was handed new, more serious ethics charges on Wednesday: that he withheld favorable DNA evidence from defendants in the Duke lacrosse sexual assault case and then repeatedly lied about it to judges and the N.C. State Bar.

The complaint by the State Bar heaped a new layer of legal troubles on Nifong, who was charged by the bar in December with making inflammatory statements to reporters and misrepresenting facts in the case.

If prosecutors prevail, he could face punishment ranging from a reprimand to losing his law license.

"Lying is really at the top of the list in terms of things lawyers just can't do. The whole thing is premised on integrity," said Joseph Kennedy, a UNC Chapel Hill law professor. "And then lying about something as important as evidence suggesting innocence in a serious case, it just doesn't get any worse than that."

Nifong has been intensely criticized for how he handled the case, which began in March when an escort service dancer said she was sexually assaulted by three lacrosse players. The players -- Reade Seligmann, David Evans and Collin Finnerty -- have denied the charges of kidnapping and sexual offense and declared their innocence.

In December, Nifong dropped rape charges when the woman said she no longer knew whether she had been raped. Nifong asked the N.C. attorney general to relieve him as prosecutor this month because of the earlier bar charges.

The new charges center on Nifong's handling of DNA evidence.

In March, the State Bureau of Investigation examined the accuser's underwear and swabs taken from her body. The SBI was unable to find semen, blood or saliva on the evidence.

In April, Nifong got a judge's permission to go to a private lab for more sophisticated tests.

The lab, DNA Security of Burlington, found DNA from at least four unidentified men but none from any lacrosse player. Brian Meehan, the lab director, discussed the results with Nifong in April and May.

Those results were not given to defense lawyers, who repeatedly asked for all DNA test results, the bar's complaint said. Nifong then lied to the court, either on paper or in direct comments to a judge, on five occasions from May to September, the complaint said.

The withheld evidence came to light at a Dec. 15 court hearing where lab director Meehan testified that he and Nifong agreed in the spring not to report all the test results.

When the State Bar notified Nifong on Dec. 20 that it was investigating the withheld evidence and false statements, Nifong acknowledged that he knew of the DNA results in April and May, the complaint said.

Nifong told the bar he didn't report the results because he was concerned about violating the privacy rights of the players, two of whom had been indicted. He also told the bar he didn't realize the favorable test results weren't included in the May 12 report from DNA Security.

The bar responded bluntly that Nifong's responses "were knowingly false." Privacy was not a concern because the DNA Security report listed the names of all the people tested, including the 46 lacrosse players. And Meehan had testified that he and Nifong agreed in the spring to withhold the test results.

Nifong declined to comment Wednesday.

While the bar limits what a lawyer can say about a case outside court, every lawyer has a duty to be honest in court, according to Mary Ann Tally, a defense lawyer who has followed bar cases against prosecutors.

"For a lawyer to be accused by the State Bar of this type of conduct and this type of misrepresentation, to me this is one of the most serious charges that a lawyer could face," she said.

Such charges against a prosecutor are unprecedented, she said.

How It Works

The charges against Nifong will be heard at the State Bar. A trial date has not been set. Prosecutors are State Bar Counsel Katherine Jean and Doug Brocker, a private lawyer who used to work for the bar. Nifong is represented by David Freedman and Dudley Witt of Winston-Salem. A three-member panel of the Disciplinary Hearing Commission will act as judge and jury. The commission is legally a separate entity from the State Bar. The chairman of the panel is Lane Williamson of Charlotte.

Wow, this guy is just a horrible lawyer and an even worse DA. I hope he is banned from the bar and is banned from practicing ever again.
Gauthier
25-01-2007, 22:22
Now we know who Matt Groening got his inspiration for Lionel Hutz from.
Farnhamia
25-01-2007, 22:23
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/16539857.htm


Wow, this guy is just a horrible lawyer and an even worse DA. I hope he is banned from the bar and is banned from practicing ever again.

I think he meant well at the start, but he should have dropped the case long ago. His dogged insistence on pursuing it this far has made it that much harder in the future for women to get justice after being raped.
Wilgrove
25-01-2007, 22:47
Where are the charges against this dirty lying whore that made the false accusations?

She should be put in prison.

Eh what good would it do, they won't get any money out of it and their reputations are already ruined, even though the charges has been dropped people will still be whisper "Hey isn't that the white guy that was accused of raping that black girl? The damage has already been done to the three players.
New Granada
25-01-2007, 22:49
Where are the charges against this dirty lying whore that made the false accusations?

She should be put in prison.
New Mitanni
25-01-2007, 22:53
I think he meant well at the start, but he should have dropped the case long ago.


You're half right. IMNSHO he did not mean well at the start, but saw this case as a horse he could ride to re-election by playing the race card and thus getting black votes.

I look forward to his resignation, disbarment, imprisonment and financial ruin following a huge civil judgment against him and in favor of the three innocent students he has wilfully and maliciously damaged. He is a disgrace to the legal profession.