NationStates Jolt Archive

the north carolina attny general has finally dropped all the charges against the duke lacrosse players. he declared them INNOCENT VICTIMS.


RALEIGH, N.C. - Prosecutors dropped all charges Wednesday against the three Duke lacrosse players accused of sexually assaulting a stripper at a party, saying the athletes were innocent victims of a “tragic rush to accuse” by an overreaching district attorney.

“There were many points in the case where caution would have served justice better than bravado,” North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper said in a damning assessment of Durham County District Mike Nifong’s handling of the sensational case.

Cooper, who took over the case in January after Nifong was charged with ethics violations that could get him disbarred, said his own investigation concluded not only that the evidence against the young men was insufficient, but that no attack took place.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18046103/?GT1=9246

these guys have had rape charges hanging over their heads for more than a year. it beyond time to have them dropped.

I hope Nifong gets disbarred.

This was another Tawana Brawley case, and this time, the prosecutor decided to hype it for his own political benefit.

I'm glad it blew up in his face.

If I were them, I'd countersue for this.

Meh...does it count as trolling if I say I think they're still guilty?

their legal bills must be staggering.

its been a nightmare for them and their whole families.

i dont know if they CAN sue, but the state of north carolina should at least pick up the tab for their lawyers.

If I were them, I'd countersue for this.

It would be easy. If I was the state, I would seek an out of court settlement now.

The university also has to worry - while they said they would respect the claims of innocence of the players, they made comments to the press that were less than helpful (and in some cases, accusatory).

I would also sue the professors who resigned in protest at the original rape charges being dropped - the AG in his statement has said that the state believes the guys were innocent of all charges.

So I would take the resignations and public statements of those professors to be slander.

Meh...does it count as trolling if I say I think they're still guilty?

1. No matching DNA evidence - although the semen found in and on her body belonged to several other men, identities unknown.

2. No consistent story from one questioning of the accuser to the next questioning. Wildly varying tales of what happened.

3. The other woman present that night says she never saw the accuser being raped.

So, yes, that would be trolling in most forums...

Meh...does it count as trolling if I say I think they're still guilty?

it would only be trolling if you dont give a reason and then refuse to discuss anything but why you arent really a troll.

1. No matching DNA evidence - although the semen found in and on her body belonged to several other men, identities unknown.

2. No consistent story from one questioning of the accuser to the next questioning. Wildly varying tales of what happened.

3. The other woman present that night says she never saw the accuser being raped.

So, yes, that would be trolling in most forums...

4) gross misconduct on the part of the prosecutor including leaks to the press and a photo lineup that included only photos of members of the lacrosse team.

It would be easy. If I was the state, I would seek an out of court settlement now.

The university also has to worry - while they said they would respect the claims of innocence of the players, they made comments to the press that were less than helpful (and in some cases, accusatory).

I would also sue the professors who resigned in protest at the original rape charges being dropped - the AG in his statement has said that the state believes the guys were innocent of all charges.

So I would take the resignations and public statements of those professors to be slander.

I can see the state getting sued and possibly the university but how and why would you sue someone for quitting their own job in "protest"?

I can see the state getting sued and possibly the university but how and why would you sue someone for quitting their own job in "protest"?

1. They made a very public statement to the press.
2. They stated that they resigned because they believed you to be guilty.
3. They intended for the public statement to harm the accused students - i.e., to get the state to find a way to find them guilty.

Looks like intent to me.

.

I would also sue the professors who resigned in protest at the original rape charges being dropped - the AG in his statement has said that the state believes the guys were innocent of all charges.

So I would take the resignations and public statements of those professors to be slander.

I guess I can't say that O. J. did it, because it'll be slanderous, after all he was acquitted.

I guess I can't say that O. J. did it, because it'll be slanderous, after all he was acquitted.

If you had made a public, national spectacle of making such a statement, with intent to influence the prosecution, then yes, it would be.

I firmly believe that any women who makes up trumped up rape charges should be sent to a prison full of rapists who can rape her to their hearts' content.

Bearing false witness is a big biblical no no along with the whole thou shall not kill prohibition. False rape allegations are devestating to the victim.

False rape allegations also are insulting to real rape victims and undermines the criminal justice system. If women did not do this crap. It would be a whole heck of a lot easier to put away the real rapists.

1. No matching DNA evidence - although the semen found in and on her body belonged to several other men, identities unknown.

2. No consistent story from one questioning of the accuser to the next questioning. Wildly varying tales of what happened.

3. The other woman present that night says she never saw the accuser being raped.

So, yes, that would be trolling in most forums...

If the only reason I thought they were guilty were because they were rich and male, I would be a troll. However, I consider this - they were at that party, and things got, shall we say, out of hand. Therefore, they may not be guilty of rape, but they have got to be guilty of bad behavior and of casting their entire program in a bad light.

However, stupidity is not a crime. Carelessness and boorish behavior are not crimes. I guess that's why they are free to go.

As long as that disgusting slimebag of a human being prosecutor gets disbarred, things should be fine.

Also, the dirty little slut that did this should ideally be charged with some kind of crime - giving false reports to the police, perhaps? She should probably also be sued.

If you had made a public, national spectacle of making such a statement, with intent to influence the prosecution, then yes, it would be.

And to think we have been poking fun on the account of O.J.'s and Michael Jackson's acquittal.

1. They made a very public statement to the press.
2. They stated that they resigned because they believed you to be guilty.
3. They intended for the public statement to harm the accused students - i.e., to get the state to find a way to find them guilty.

Looks like intent to me.
They intended for the public statements to help the woman, intent is not so clear cut.
With that would their actions under us law could (and in my opinion should) be considered personal opinion, something not covered under slander laws

But even so as a private party they are NOT held to the same level as something like a news publisher.

In the end it would be a rather petty act, probably cost more money then would ever be gotten out of thoes professors anyways

I am not saying their actions were right by any means but the fact is suing an individual for protesting something (even if it turns out to not be true) should not be legal

They intended for the public statements to help the woman, intent is not so clear cut.
With that would their actions under us law could (and in my opinion should) be considered personal opinion, something not covered under slander laws

But even so as a private party they are NOT held to the same level as something like a news publisher.

In the end it would be a rather petty act, probably cost more money then would ever be gotten out of thoes professors anyways

I am not saying their actions were right by any means but the fact is suing an individual for protesting something (even if it turns out to not be true) should not be legal

If I had already won money from the state and the university, I would be free to spend a bit of it on ruining the lives of the professors in question.

I could even hope that they could be goaded into saying something really stupid during the deposition stage.

They would be impoverished by trying to pay for their defense.

their legal bills must be staggering.

its been a nightmare for them and their whole families.

i dont know if they CAN sue, but the state of north carolina should at least pick up the tab for their lawyers.

I cant imagine the anxiety they've lived with over this.

Its a shame everything wasnt dropped against them 6 months ago.

Its also a shame that we are somewhat familiar with them- Their names and faces have been on the news so often. This may follow them for a long time.

On the other hand- I cant recall the phoney accuser's name or what she looks like.
And I wonder if Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/Push Coalition still plans to pay the accuser's college tuition?

Seems like a good idea,rewarding destructive fraud,with the proceeds of charitable donations,right? :rolleyes:

We also have the issue of the team's coach?? Wasnt he fired?

There is another individual who was pretty rudely roughed up and spit out.
For no reason whatsoever.

Both Nifong and the accuser deserve jail time.

I cant imagine the anxiety they've lived with over this.

Its a shame everything wasnt dropped against them 6 months ago.

Its also a shame that we are somewhat familiar with them- Their names and faces have been on the news so often. This may follow them for a long time.

On the other hand- I cant recall the phoney accuser's name or what she looks like.
And I wonder if Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/Push Coalition still plans to pay the accuser's college tuition?

Seems like a good idea,rewarding destructive fraud,with the proceeds of charitable donations,right? :rolleyes:


i just heard on the radio that jesse jackson said that the boys should just forget it and get on with their lives.

fucking hypocrit

i just heard on the radio that jesse jackson said that the boys should just forget it and get on with their lives.

fucking hypocrit

Yep, yep, this is why I hate Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and wish that the general public would just tell them to go sit in a corner and shut up.

The prosecution alone is not responsible for ruining the lives of these guys. America has a media that thrives on reporting news people think they need to hear (tonight: a guy is accused of sexual assault. Watch as this rapist, who probably eats puppies alive and steals kids' lunch money, gets the justice he deserves. tommorrow: nuclear war has been declared, but the mushroom clouds aren't as important as the death of a Hollywood slut. If we survive the radiation, we'll talk about her sex life and the *facts about her death) and then exports it elsewhere. I guess American tv could be considered world tv since the corporations love to shove it into other countries. Nobody's going to remember the quick two-minute aquittal of charges. What they will remember are a six-month media circus and the death of a Hollywood has-been.

*these facts may or may not be true and not made up lies intended to boost ratings. We are not responsible for any lies we knowingly told you. Our fact-checkers may or may not actually check for facts. Please disregard any real facts anyone else tells you, as these facts might lead you to not believe our malicious lies. results may vary. Please consult a doctor before listening to us and our lies.

In the media, it's not innocent until proven guilty. It's guilty, guilty, guilty. It's not about justice being served. It's about ratings, which encourage companies to pay to have their comercials shown at peak viewing times. That's the sad thing about today. Back then, you didn't have instant communication unless you counted talking to someone a few feet away. You had lots of time to make sure the story you got was the real story. Now, in today's age of internetting people and takling to people you've never met by using a means that confuses and scares me, everything gets reported instantly. Deaths of has-beens and never-was-es. Rumors. Speculations. Lies. Fact checking? Too slow. Getting both sides? Nobody wants a fair trial. they want a David-vs-Goliath case of a young black woman being maliciously attacked by the young, rich, evil white kkk-supporting nazis next door. It gets viewers. It gets ratings. It gets innocent mens' lives ruined and gives real rape victims a bad name. It's lose-lose for the innocent accused and those who really were raped.

The media shares a goodly portion of the blame. But I believe that the prosecuter of this case made a bad situation exponentially worse by providing information to the media the way he did.

How long before someone comes out and accuses the NC Attorney General of being "OMtehG RAZIST!!!11111"