N.C. Attorney General: Duke students are "INNOCENT."

[pnwmom]

Accuser wanted to go forward, but other evidence contradicts her story, and she contradicts herself.

There is NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE.

"the Durham District Attorney pushed forward unchecked."

"Caution would have been better than bravado."

"We need to learn from this and keep it from happening to ANYBODY."

He proposes a law that the N.C. Supreme Court will have the authority to remove a case from a prosecutor under certain circumstances.

[soothsayer]

1. Not surprised they got away with it.

[pnwmom]

2. If you read the accuser's own contradictory accounts -- which are

online -- you would see that she never had a story that made sense.

These students were falsely prosecuted under a "rogue prosecutor."

The attorney general says she has told "many stories" and the specifics of the stories will be released next week.

He says that they have considered criminal charges against her, but they've decided she believes the "many different stories" she's been telling. So they won't be pressing charges against her. The implication is that she is mentally disturbed.

[jhrobbins]

3. Is your assessment based on ANY evidence or just your innate

prejudice?

[woo me with science]

12. It's a club.

No woman EVER lies about such things.

No accused man is EVER innocent.

Evidence is irrelevant.

The Truth is determined by our agendas.

[cgrindley]

5. come on

you cannot possibly be serious

[murloc]

6. She almost did

Fortunately justice prevailed.

[Mike Daniels]

23. And your supporting evidence that they got away with it?

Waiting, waiting, waiting....

Crickets....

Thought so.

I suppose you think that Tawana Brawley was telling the truth as well despite people that technically should have been willing to support her story stating that they saw her elsewhere when her supposed rape took place.

[kwassa]

4. Dropping a case only means it is not prosecutable

It is not a declaration of innocence.

[cgrindley]

7. Actually, Cooper did declare their innocence

did you listen to the report?

[pnwmom]

8. That was a quote. The Attorney General specifically said they are

INNOCENT. He emphasized that. He said there was no credible evidence for their prosecution, and that Nifong was a "rogue prosecutor."

MSNBC commentators:

"I have never heard a prosecutor come out so strongly against charges as he's come out now."

"a stunning pronouncement."

"A real shocker" -- how strong the Attorney General's comments were.

He says apologies are due.

Even longtime pro-Nifong commentator was most surprised by Attorney General saying that the students were "innocent."

[Henryman]

9. The Attorney General has no power.....

or authority to declare anybody INNOCENT of anything!

He or she can only decide whether to prosecute or not.

[pnwmom]

15. That's what YOU think. The Attorney General declared them INNOCENT.

He obviously doesn't agree with you.

[Henryman]

52. "That's what you think!", "That's what you think!"

pnwmom, your response is so childish. Can you now admit the Attorney General did not declare anybody innocent? He simply meant these kids are presumed innocent.

[Lex]

10. The AG wasn't there that night, so not even he knows what happened.

But clearly there was not enough evidence for their prosecution and charges should've been dropped long ago.

[pnwmom]

17. He knows that her contradictory stories also contradicted all the outside

evidence they were able to gather. And he has her personal medical records "under seal" which led them to decide that she sincerely believes all the numerous contradictory stories she's been telling. That's why she wasn't charged criminally.

[kwassa]

13. The word "innocent" is nowhere in that story. "Insufficient evidence" is.

I agree that a prosecutor can't declare anyone innocent.

[pnwmom]

14. You are flat wrong. The Attorney General used the word "innocent"

in a very strong statement about the players in his press conference. I heard him. You obviously didn't listen.

[kwassa]

16. Find the source, then. The reference given didn't have it.

The two online stories that I've seen so far haven't had that, either.

[pnwmom]

18. I AM the source. I was watching him on TV, and typing as he spoke.

[kwassa]

21. I looked at a CNN link in another thread.

Sorry.

Washington Post didn't have the "innocent" comment either.

[kwassa]

19. here it is, finally.

http://www.reuters.com/article/sportsNews/idUSN1121535720070411

"We believe that these cases were the result of a tragic rush to accuse and a failure to verify serious allegations," said Cooper.

"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," he said.

[pnwmom]

24. Thank you for the link. And might I add,

when the Attorney General spoke, his voice emphasized strongly the word "innocent."

[blondeatlast]

50. Then they are, by default, in the legal sense, innocent. Guilt is the only thing

that must be proven.

OJ Simpson and Kobe Bryant are innocent, regardless of what opinion I hold.

If we lose the intent of justice, we lose our country. Think Gitmo.

[originalpckelly]

11. Conviction still depends upon evidence and due process of law.

Accusation is not proof of guilt, but merely accusation.

Even young and privileged white men are entitled to the presumption of innocence.

In this case, however, I think we should note that their status did insure that they were not prosecuted falsely, and that the DA who did this is now being investigated.

On has to wonder if that would have happened, had this been a group of young black men and a white woman.

[pnwmom]

22. They actually have been prosecuted on false charges for more than a year.

But the prosecution has ended in a dismissal of all charges prior to trial.

The students families have incurred millions of dollars in debt to the attorneys, by the way. But because they were able to take that on, many other defendants in Durham will be spared the Nifong touch.

[Mike Daniels]

25. If the races had been reversed you would have seen DU attacking the prosecutor

and accusing the prosecution team of railroading the accused despite a complete lack of supporting evidence.

But instead, because the victim was black and the accused were white you had posters decide the exact opposite and pillory the athletes w/out a shred of evidence.

[pnwmom]

30. I'm afraid that I have to agree with you. People also may have been misled

because the prosecutor is a Democrat, nominally anyway.

[butterfly77]

20. We don't know what happened...

but something went on for it to go this far...

[renie408]

26. Uh, yeah. Mike Nifong's ego trip went on that long. This kind of comment

And many others on this board just go to show how much damage was actually done to the men's reputations in this case.

[pnwmom]

28. Exactly. Those students will never be over this, because of attitudes

like that.

I can never understand how some DU'ers can have so much faith in the system. Haven't they ever heard of false prosecutions before?

[kwassa]

32. But the system worked, didn't it?

It worked exactly the way it was supposed to. The accused students were exonerated. The system worked.

[renie408]

33. Not well enough. n/t

[pnwmom]

34. No, the system didn't work.

The system is supposed to prevent rogue prosecutions. Charges aren't supposed to be brought, indictments aren't supposed to happen, if there isn't sufficient evidence to support a win at trial.

Being charged with crimes that could bring DECADES in prison meant that these three students and their families went through a year of hell -- as well as millions of dollars (I've heard estimates of $3-5 million) in attorneys fees.

What if these students had been scholarship students at Duke, and their parents hadn't been able to hire these top-notch attorneys? Should the system working depend on how well off your family is?

Of course not. But thanks to the resources of these families, a prosecutor who probably has a history of underhanded tactics is now out of a job. And hopefully will stay that way.

[kwassa]

39. The system is supposed to prevent rogue prosecutions?

Where is that in the books? The only control on that are the people that elect the prosecutor, in this case. After that, it is up to the judgement of the prosecutor whether or not to prosecute.

The system worked. Nifong actually, finally recused himself. He could have gone to trial and lost. He has civil suits against him. He will probably lose those cases.

[kiahzero]

42. Yes, the system is supposed to prevent rogue prosecutions.

The reason Nifong is being investigated by the State Bar is because he broke the system.

[kwassa]

43. Therefore, the system works, doesn't it?

If he is disbarred, he loses his ability to make his living, doesn't he?

Is he protected from civil suits in his job? It doesn't sound like it.

[kiahzero]

45. Did "the system work" with Nixon?

The failsafe system worked... the general system did not.

[kwassa]

46. What other safeguards are on prosecutors, aside from what is happening now?

Aren't those safeguards happening right now?

[pnwmom]

47. It is broken if you have to spend millions in order to get a fair result.

If these students hadn't had such good lawyers, they would probably be in jail now. Defendants shouldn't have to be wealthy in order to be treated fairly.

[Nye Bevan]

36. I don't think you would be saying that if you were one of the young men

falsely accused by Crystal Mangum.

These young men were thrown out of the school, lost a year of their lives, and spent millions in legal fees. A reasonable prosecutor would have thrown out the charges months ago.

[pnwmom]

27. The something that went on is this:

There was a mentally unstable accuser, whose medical history records are now "under seal" who -- when facing an involuntary detention in an alcohol treatment center -- told the first of her numerous contradictory stories about rape, and got sent to the hospital instead of the treatment center.

Nifong saw a case that could bring him lots of favorable media publicity in the critical weeks before a hotly contested election, in which he was being vastly outspent by his competitor. He came up from behind to win that election by a few points -- beating a popular African American candidate in a majority black district.

Once he started the case, he apparently was too stubborn to stop it. He was a "rogue prosecutor" according to the State Attorney General, who needed to be stopped.

[Nye Bevan]

29. Yes. Something did happen.

What happened was that a cynical mendacious DA who was desperate to win re-election seized upon the false allegations of a delusional or lying troubled young women to win some votes, at the cost of ruining the lives of several innocent young men. And it worked. Well, he did win re-election. I sincerely hope that Nifong will end up in jail, or at a minimum, disbarred.

[pnwmom]

31. Me, too. They should throw the book at Nifong.

[Kagemusha]

41. Is abusing prosecutorial discretion to lock in an election win on your list of maybes?

Does it rate as a possibility to you, I wonder? I ask without malice or accusation. I'm bringing up the possibility to counter an impression that the something that went on must have been a criminal act by the accused themselves. There's lots of room here for criminal acts by others as well, including the district attorney.

[KamaAina]

35. Has Imus weighed in on this yet?

:hide:

[Forkboy]

37. ...

:spank:

:rofl:

[NaturalHigh]

38. When will Crystal Mangum be prosecuted...

for filing a FALSE rape report?

[ruiner4u]

40. she wont...

and the media wont say anything about THAT little tidbit...

[kwassa]

44. they already have mentioned it ....

the defense sees her as a troubled soul, and that Nifong was the source of the problem. That was in the CNN story.

[pnwmom]

49. One of the reporters at the press conference asked if the woman

wasn't being prosecuted for lying because she was mentally unstable. (The Attorney General had said she seemed to believe ALL of her contradictory stories.) The Attorney General didn't answer directly, just said that they had information about her history in a sealed file, that led them to decide not to charge her with lying.

The obvious implication is that she wasn't charged because she's not in touch with reality.

[Bake]

48. The AG drops the charges and says they're innocent

But look at the number of people here who are still cock-sure that they "got away with it." Why? For no other reason than that they are rich white kids. Don't bother them with the FACTS, their conclusions are based on their prejudices.

Prejudice is wrong, no matter who owns it or who is the target. DUers like to think we're so much better than freepers. Guess what ... some of you aren't any better than freepers.

Between the Duke case and the Imus case, what we've seen exposed here in the last few days is ugly and speaks VOLUMES about this place.

Bake

[Blackhatjack]

51. Nifong violated the duty to 'seek justice' rather than a conviction at any cost....

Someone asked if there were any laws on the books that applied to prosecutors. Yes, prosecutors and defense attorneys are each 'officers of the court.'

The prosecutor has the added duty to 'seek the truth and justice' in making decisions as to who should be prosecuted. Nifong violated this duty, as well as numerous ethical violations.

In all likelihood he will be disbarred for withholding exculpatory evidence('evidence tending to prove innocence'), and misuing the power of his office.

There really is no individual likely available to sue that would result in recovering any significant amount of money to offset the huge legal fees and expenses these young men incurred.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

53. This is why prosecutors and judges should be appointed, not elected.

Those who make the laws should be answerable to the electorate.

Those who enforce the laws should be answerable only to the law.

Here in the UK, both judges and prosecutors are appointed, with the result that cases like this, while not unheard of, are rare.

Unfortunately, there have recently been a spate of attempts by governments to interfere in the outcome of specific high-profile criminal cases for political ends, though.