Duke lacrosse case

[Chris_Halkides]

Within the last few days Crystal Mangum recanted her accusation against the three Duke lacrosse players. My intention for this thread is that it can cover any aspect of the 2006-2007 case, including Ms. Mangum's conviction. This case has many earmarks of false accusations or convictions: At least one witness was pressured to change his testimony; the prosecution attempted to break the alibis of the accused; the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence; and there may be others that I have forgotten. It also featured some awful and some good journalism (much of the latter came from the blogosphere). A 2013 book by William Cohan, The Price of Silence, attempted to resuscitate the case against the three players.

For those wanting to delve into the case, Rachel Smolkin's article in the July/August 2007 issue of the American Journalism Review is a good place to start. Ms. Smolkin wrote, "Maybe some journalists, such as Sheehan, really will apply more prudence and skepticism in the future. But the media's collective memory is notoriously short, and competitive pressures are awfully hard to resist. Official assurances--whether about the guilt of privileged athletes or the existence of weapons of mass destruction--can persuade, even when they shouldn't. Journalists, in Keller's phrase, can get 'sucked into the undertow.'"
EDT
I would like to keep this thread focused on issues surrounding investigations of alleged crimes and the rush to judgment that occurred in this case.

 

[Thermal]

But the real question is, how does this affect the #MeToo movement, and shouldn't we really go back to ignoring these women?

(This recanting story already has its own thread in SI&CE)

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I would prefer to focus, for example, on the following question: DA Nifong's used some standard maneuvers in a successful attempt to indict the three players, but he was unsuccessful in bringing the case to trial. Then AG Roy Cooper declared them innocent. Why did he fail? My answer is that being both upper middle class and factually innocent is a good combination in our criminal justice system, whereas being innocent and poor frequently does not cut any ice.

 

[PitPat]

I would prefer to focus, for example, on the following question: DA Nifong's used some standard maneuvers in a successful attempt to indict the three players, but he was unsuccessful in bringing the case to trial. Then AG Roy Cooper declared them innocent. Why did he fail? My answer is that being both upper middle class and factually innocent is a good combination in our criminal justice system, whereas being innocent and poor frequently does not cut any ice.

If you're of a certain age, you remember this case. She was convicted of killing her boyfriend years later.

I saw a doc on that case, and she always denied it. I guess she's found Jesus now. She said

“I hope that [the players] can heal and trust God and know that God loves them and that God is loving them through me, letting them know that they're valuable,” she said.

https://www.dukechronicle.com/artic...s-finnerty-seligmann-brodhead-pressler-nifong

I'm sure the families feel closure now. And Nifong got what he deserved.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

When Brad Bannon was preparing to defend David Evans, one of the three accused players, he read John Butler's textbook on DNA profiling. His cross-examination of Dr. Brian Meehan was one of the pivotal moments of the case. For the newest edition of his three-volume textbook Dr. Butler asked Mr. Bannon to comment on aspects of how a defense attorney would challenge DNA evidence. Mr. Bannon replied in part, "Did the lab follow acceptable standards of DNA analysis? Did it follow its own protocols? Is the lab applying those standards and protocols consistently or selectively? For example, why do you call a peak below 150 RFU as a true allele for one purpose, or in one case, but not for another? If there are such internal inconsistencies, do they usually inure to the benefit of one side's theory of the case? If so, is that evidence of bias?"

Mr. Bannon's point about consistency of threshold values for peaks is similar to one found in the textbook An Introduction to Forensic DNA analysis, 2nd ed. (Rudin, N. and Inman, K., CRC Press 2002, p. 121) states, “It is important to have some predetermined limit to distinguish what is signal and what is noise.” Without a clear guideline, a scientist may make choices that benefit his or her preferred hypothesis, even subconsciously.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

In response to misleading statements within William Cohan's book "The Price of Silence," I extensively discussed the the DNA evidence in this case here. "If Mr. Nifong had brought the case to trial, it is difficult to predict how a jury would weigh the fingernail DNA evidence against potential alibi witnesses for Mr. Evans (Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Seligman had electronic alibis). Juries have occasionally ignored strong alibi evidence in favor of weak or questionable evidence, as in the cases of Jonathan Fleming and Russ Faria."

 

[Brainster]

I would prefer to focus, for example, on the following question: DA Nifong's used some standard maneuvers in a successful attempt to indict the three players, but he was unsuccessful in bringing the case to trial. Then AG Roy Cooper declared them innocent. Why did he fail? My answer is that being both upper middle class and factually innocent is a good combination in our criminal justice system, whereas being innocent and poor frequently does not cut any ice.

It didn't hurt to have tons of media attention which quickly resulted in the holes in the prosecution's case being exposed. Not sure if Nifong had read Tom Wolfe's Bonfire of the Vanities, but he clearly recognized that convicting the Great White Defendants would boost his political profile. And it's hard to give him the benefit of the doubt on the case when he admitted six months after charging the three players that neither he, nor members of the prosecution team, had even interviewed the supposed victim. I can only conclude that he was intentionally trying to shield himself from any evidence that went against the rape charges.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Another thing to consider is that the team had some generally good informal legal advice early on. This included the suggestion that they hold onto food receipts and other things that would buttress their alibis.

 

[MovieandTVFan88]

I remember this story. It was an astonishing case of injustice.

Among other things, I remember being astonished at the racial and gender politics of this.

A bunch of rich white boys in the South at a prestigious university were accused of raping a poor black woman with a disreputable past ...and the South was on her side ? Rich white Southern women like Nancy Grace railroaded the guys?

Wow. What a reversal.

You'd think this would be flipped.