April 24, 2006

Duke Lacrosse Case

It's taking a little time to work it's way around the blogosphere, but some people have figured out who the accuser is in the Duke lacrosse case.

The accused have been identified; do you think the accuser should be as well?

***
Previous postings:
Accused Duke Lacrosse Player Guilty
The Duke Case
What's On The Menu
Twists And Turns

Posted by floridacracker at April 24, 2006 04:22 AM

   



Comments

You seem to have decided that the Duke guys are innocent and that the continuing case is a political effort by the DA, and it may be just that ... but don't you think there's a possibility that facts could come out after the prosecution constructs their case? Stuff not available in press reports?

I'm sort of in a wait and see mode on this.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 24, 2006 08:34 AM

Hell, I took it for granted they were guilty. Until she came back with no DNA or latex or her, etc. Then I noticed the press seemed to think they were guilty as well.
Did you see what the NYT editor Byron Calame wrote the other day? He was writing a defense of the Times coverage (people had complained it was lopsided in favor of the woman) and in the last paragraph he said:

"A final thought, based on my review of The Times's performance: Covering the legal proceedings that seem likely to focus on the extremely serious charges of sexual assault and kidnapping is vital. But the paper needs to keep an eye on the allegations and reports about the racial insults voiced by various players, and on the lacrosse team's seemingly flawed culture. If the rape and kidnapping charges do not hold up, the story doesn't end. The Times should be prepared to continue covering what is done about the racial-insult allegations, given the prominence of the team and the university."

If the life-shattering charges of rape and kidnap "don't hold up," the NYT will proudly continue coverage of allegations of insult. There's no way these guys are going to get a fair word in that paper, even if she turns out to be Tawana Brawley Jr.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/23/opinion/23pubed.html?hp

Posted by: Donnah at April 24, 2006 08:47 AM

If someone is so *familiar* with the system as to have eluded prosecution in the 'assaulting an officer, vehicle theft, etc.' , and adding in the
time lags of her reporting this incident, I figure
what happened was something akin to Drunken Private Stripper's Rough Sex Splurge (with a couple special customers) Goes Sour After Dancer
Figures the racial slurs weren't worth the money..

The lady sounds Bi-polar or psychotic to me...with a tad bit o the alcoholism

Posted by: csason at April 24, 2006 04:12 PM

Donnah -

Good points. That Times statement is ludicrous.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 24, 2006 05:41 PM

stinks like yesterdays diapers, even if they are heinous, she's heinous too. good lord, embezzlment of 25K, stealing a cab, drunken driving, avoiding the cop, blah blah, SUCH A FINE CONTENT TO HER CHARACTER. (gets off soapbox)

Posted by: richard at April 25, 2006 09:40 PM

see there kiddies..that's what happens when you run off and join the rhubarb team, hire strippers
(hoping it'll get 'real') and forget to wear clean underwear. I think the whole thing was a setup for Cindy McKinney to hide under.

Posted by: csason at April 25, 2006 10:11 PM