PDA

View Full Version : Beaten, raped and had racial slurs yelled at her.


Pages : 1 [2]

Jeana (DP)
04-11-2006, 02:54 PM
What evidence of condom usage would they expect to find? And why would the men use lubricant if their intention was to hurt her? I'm guessing that the alleged injuries that were found in the woman's private areas were indicative of the type of force or friction a woman would experience if subjected to penetration without natural or artificial lubricants.

They didn't even find any of her DNA in the bathroom. If at least four people are involved, wouldn't someone's DNA be somewhere?

Wudge
04-11-2006, 02:55 PM
How did race matter in the Peterson case? White victim -- white defendant. Why would a black jury care what a rich white man did to his rich white wife? Besides, I beg to differ. I didn't see one bit of reasonable doubt.


Sans Nancy Grace, the other Court TV's [America's all guilty, all the time, channel] moderators were basically expecting an acquittal. And having lived in the Research Triangle Park area that takes in Raleigh, Wake Forest and Durham, I can assure you that the history of racial tensions in Durham has existed, basically, forever.

One juror summed up deliberations and the guilty verdict the following way: "der wud all dat blood". That was it. I mean that was it! I repeat: der wud all dat blood. Ergo, guilty.

Hardly Aristotelian reasoning, but pretty typical for Durham -- and much of the rest of North Carolina too.

Jeana (DP)
04-11-2006, 02:57 PM
Sans Nancy Grace, the other Court TV's [America's all guilty, all the time, channel] moderators were basically expecting an acquittal. And having lived in the Research Triangke Park area that takes in Raleigh, Wake Forest and Durham, I can assure you that the history of racial tensions in Durham has existed, basically, forever.

One juror summed up deliberations and the guilty verdict the following way: "der wud all dat blood". That was it. I mean that was it! I repeat: der wud all dat blood. Ergo, guilty.

Hardly Aristotelian reasoning, but pretty typical for Durham -- and much of the rest of North Carolina too.


Wudge,

:slap:


And I mean that with much love. LOL

Wudge
04-11-2006, 03:05 PM
What evidence of condom usage would they expect to find? And why would the men use lubricant if their intention was to hurt her? I'm guessing that the alleged injuries that were found in the woman's private areas were indicative of the type of force or friction a woman would experience if subjected to penetration without natural or artificial lubricants.

Ovbiously, a condom expert would be appropriate, and condoms do vary in their manufacture, but, at least some, some do have a light coating of fine powder/lubricant that should be identifiable in testing.

Jeana (DP)
04-11-2006, 03:07 PM
Interesting comments on this website:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191314,00.html

Wudge
04-11-2006, 03:09 PM
Wudge,

:slap:


And I mean that with much love. LOL


Hugs and salute.

Clearly, we would all want better if we were on trial for murder.

Jeana (DP)
04-11-2006, 03:16 PM
Hugs and salute.

Clearly, we would all want better if we were on trial for murder.


I hate to get off topic here, but I watched about 17 hours of documentary on the Peterson case and they had everything but a videotape of him killing her and that was done by a director who wanted to prove he was innocent. Couldn't do it. It destroyed Henry Lee's reputation for me and I was under no illusions about expert witnesses to begin with.

Anyway, I'd like to believe the young woman in this case wasn't desperate enough to ruin lives for cash, but at this point, I'm just not sure.

Bee Charmer
04-11-2006, 03:28 PM
There was an excellent article about Mr. Nifong, in the News Observer. He is said to be a very ethical prosecutor. I do not think he should be termed a political opportunist, based on no facts. His job is to prosecute if the evidence points to a crime being committed. I think that is exactly what he is doing. Apparently a high percentage of rapes do not have dna present. I think he would be derelict in his duty if he did not continue to investigate this case. He stated at the NCC forum, that there is outstanding dna testing and he is awaiting those results. There is no rush to judgement here, imo. I think he will get to the bottom of this case with good old fashioned police work.

BTW, in my view any person that falsely accuses someone of rape, should be prosecuted to the full extent the law allows. I just don't think that is the case here.

BhamMama
04-11-2006, 03:34 PM
Ovbiously, a condom expert would be appropriate, and condoms do vary in their manufacture, but, at least some, some do have a light coating of fine powder/lubricant that should be identifiable in testing.Unless....and this is stretching I know....one of them is allergic to latex and had all natural sheepskin or polymer condoms and they used those instead. Yes, they are expensive but a 'spur of the moment' rape doesn't call for thinking. No lube or powder in those. You have to use spermicide and lube if you use them.

Please don't ask me how I know! :blushing:

But they don't protect against STDS like latex ones do without the spermicide.

I don't know who to believe.

Summerskye1
04-11-2006, 03:34 PM
They didn't even find any of her DNA in the bathroom. If at least four people are involved, wouldn't someone's DNA be somewhere?
I don't know. At some point I want to see if I can find any statistics about this...but I think this is the perception that the prosecutors are complaining about with regard to the CSI effect. I think maybe those shows give the impression that we, as human beings, are just sloughing off pristine and identifiable DNA strands everywhere we go when this just isn't the case.

I don't know a heck of a lot about DNA evidence, but I know this problem also arises in the context of fingerprint evidence. It happens so often that criminals touch things (even with bare hands) during a crime but no usable prints can be recovered from the items. And I don't mean that there are prints on the item but the prints don't match the defendant - I mean there just aren't any complete prints at all.

BillyGoatGruff
04-11-2006, 05:11 PM
What about the time-stamped photographs that could very well show that she was "injured" when she arrived? I think that ALL of the information should be evaluated before any of us make up our minds, but I don't think we should DISCOUNT information that may support the athletes' position in an attempt to support the "victim" in this case. Unfortunately, there are cases where someone claimed to be the victim of an attack that turned out to be bogus.

I'm not saying they did or they didn't, but let's not stick our heads in the sand here, ok?
This woman many have very well been worked over by a pimp or previous cleint before arriving, and decided to make someone pay for the situation, regardless of who they might be.

Wudge
04-11-2006, 05:14 PM
I hate to get off topic here, but I watched about 17 hours of documentary on the Peterson case and they had everything but a videotape of him killing her and that was done by a director who wanted to prove he was innocent. Couldn't do it. It destroyed Henry Lee's reputation for me and I was under no illusions about expert witnesses to begin with.

Anyway, I'd like to believe the young woman in this case wasn't desperate enough to ruin lives for cash, but at this point, I'm just not sure.


Giving false witness is nothing rare.

I would like to believe the woman was not raped. I would also like to believe she did not falsely accuse the young men of gang rape.

Do I think a crime likely took place. Yes, I do.

I just do not have enough evidence yet to assess who committed what crime.

Details
04-11-2006, 05:16 PM
I don't know. At some point I want to see if I can find any statistics about this...but I think this is the perception that the prosecutors are complaining about with regard to the CSI effect. I think maybe those shows give the impression that we, as human beings, are just sloughing off pristine and identifiable DNA strands everywhere we go when this just isn't the case.

I don't know a heck of a lot about DNA evidence, but I know this problem also arises in the context of fingerprint evidence. It happens so often that criminals touch things (even with bare hands) during a crime but no usable prints can be recovered from the items. And I don't mean that there are prints on the item but the prints don't match the defendant - I mean there just aren't any complete prints at all.It happens with the DNA too - I was on a forum with some diehards who still believe Westerfield was innocent - one of their favorite things to say was that since he didn't leave DNA evidence in the vanDam house or Danielle's room, that proved he wasn't there. And there wasn't much they found in his motorhome either.

BillyGoatGruff
04-11-2006, 05:18 PM
What evidence of condom usage would they expect to find? And why would the men use lubricant if their intention was to hurt her? I'm guessing that the alleged injuries that were found in the woman's private areas were indicative of the type of force or friction a woman would experience if subjected to penetration without natural or artificial lubricants.
Condoms, especially latex ones, leave behind their own traces, especially if force is used at all. And the tests also look for the spermicide/lubricant used on condoms as well. None of that turned up, in what was supposedly a gang rape with 3 men that left no semen, either.

The woman may very well have been raped, but not by these men, but by a previous client/pimp/boyfriend.

Details
04-11-2006, 05:34 PM
The woman may very well have been raped, but not by these men, but by a previous client/pimp/boyfriend.Defense attorney Joe Cheshire, who represents one of the team's captains, said the report indicates authorities took DNA samples from all over the alleged victim's body, including under her fingernails, and from her possessions, such as her cell phone and her clothes.
...
But Cheshire argues that even if the alleged attackers used a condom, it is likely there would have been some DNA evidence found suggesting that an assault took place. He said in this case, the report states there was no DNA to indicate that she had sex of any type recently. [/quote]Medical exam shows trauma consistient with rape, but no DNA of any kind - not just nonmatching, but none. So unless her pimp was nice enough to use a condom too... it's still open for it to be anyone. Apparently you can be raped, and there be no DNA.

Seems to me, either she was raped, and it is possible for that to happen without leaving DNA evidence behind - which leaves the lacrosse team on the hook; or she was not raped at all - in which case we don't need to worry about rough sex scenarios with pimps, previous clients, etc.

nanandjim
04-11-2006, 06:30 PM
There was no reason to believe the women, for there was no reliable, inculpatory evidence to evaluate. A person cannot intelligently establish a belief without assessing inculpatory evidence.

Until reliable and assessable evidence (not tea leaves) supports otherwise, the presumption of innocence is the only smart position.
This is true in a court of law. We are on a "sleuth" site where speculation is the norm. We have to go with what we have. It's usually not very much. So, we speculate to fill in the blanks. :)

In this case, my tea leaves told me that 'sumting not wite here.' I will wait to see what the grand jury has to say because they will have all of the evidence.

Is anyone guessing whether they indict. I am leaning towards....NO...

Details
04-11-2006, 06:36 PM
In this case, my tea leaves told me that 'sumting not wite here.' I will wait to see what the grand jury has to say because they will have all of the evidence.

Is anyone guessing whether they indict. I am leaning towards....NO...My current guess is Yes - but then I think the story is real. If they don't - that will have a lot of weight in my mind. Grand Juries pretty much only hear the prosecution's side of things, so if they say there isn't enough there with a one sided view of the case, then it's usually a very, very skinny case.

"sumting not wite here" - ah ha! You're a racist! Saying anything that isn't white('wite') is wrong! :crazy: :crazy:

kcnz
04-12-2006, 02:56 AM
We know so little of the victim but what we do know is so positive. Shes young, attractive, hard-working, courageous and quite clearly intelligent shes after all a college student. Shes also a mother of two. Im not sure what led her to exotic dancing but I suspect it has something to do with ambitions for the future not only her own but also for the future of her children. Im unsure how the Duke incident has scared her mentally and physically but one can only pray that the scars are not too deep; that she regains her position at Diamond Girls and once again forges ahead with her life plans.

Bee Charmer
04-12-2006, 06:51 AM
We know so little of the victim but what we do know is so positive. Shes young, attractive, hard-working, courageous and quite clearly intelligent shes after all a college student. Shes also a mother of two. Im not sure what led her to exotic dancing but I suspect it has something to do with ambitions for the future not only her own but also for the future of her children. Im unsure how the Duke incident has scared her mentally and physically but one can only pray that the scars are not too deep; that she regains her position at Diamond Girls and once again forges ahead with her life plans.
It has also been reported that she served her Country in
the Navy. Her father, ex husband and various others have described her
as loving, honest and caring.

In my opinion, she is much, much more then an "exotic dancer" as she is
being portrayed by the defense attorneys. I don't know what Diamond Girls is, but if it is the escort service I doubt she will return to a job that almost cost her, her life, do you?

Bee Charmer
04-12-2006, 06:53 AM
This is true in a court of law. We are on a "sleuth" site where speculation is the norm. We have to go with what we have. It's usually not very much. So, we speculate to fill in the blanks. :)

In this case, my tea leaves told me that 'sumting not wite here.' I will wait to see what the grand jury has to say because they will have all of the evidence.

Is anyone guessing whether they indict. I am leaning towards....NO...
I'm leaning to a definite yes. Why, because I think this young woman is going to appear before the GJ. Mr. Nifong finds her credible and I believe they will also.

Bee Charmer
04-12-2006, 07:00 AM
They didn't even find any of her DNA in the bathroom. If at least four people are involved, wouldn't someone's DNA be somewhere?
I am very suspicious of that statement by the defense. It has been confirmed that her fake nails were found in that bathroom, wouldn't they have traces of her, her dna on them?

Summerskye1
04-12-2006, 08:33 AM
I found an interesting article about condom trace evidence:

http://www.crimeandclues.com/condoms.htm

One thing I noted was this:

With the potential for positively identifying a suspect, most laboratories first look for traces of seminal fluids, vaginal cells, blood, and the like. Unfortunately, the solvents used to conduct this examination also remove any condom traces present, thus losing potentially valuable evidence.
Also, if the sexual assault nurse examiner or medical examiner wears powdered gloves, it can interfere with the possibility of determining the presence of condom trace evidence. Does anyone know if SANE nurses have a policy about wearing certain types of gloves?

I'm still looking for a reliable article about what conclusions are 'scientifically reasonable' when DNA is not recovered from the victim during a rape exam.

It's too bad the police weren't able to (or didn't) arrest any suspects right away. They could have examined the genitals of the men for the victim's DNA if things had happened more quickly.

Jeana (DP)
04-12-2006, 08:56 AM
I am very suspicious of that statement by the defense. It has been confirmed that her fake nails were found in that bathroom, wouldn't they have traces of her, her dna on them?


I'm not sure what to believe any more. Last night I heard that there WAS DNA evidence found, but it didn't belong to anyone they tested, which basically was the entire team. So, we're back where we started from. I just don't see why she'd have a reason to lie. Apparently she didn't say anything to the dancer she left with either and that woman didn't know anything was wrong until she got to the store and made that call to 911.

Summerskye1
04-12-2006, 09:14 AM
I also found an academic research article co-authored by Dr. Henry Lee regarding the importance of DNA evidence. It's quite long, but very interesting. One thing I noted was the percentage of prosecutors who indicated that they would proceed with charges against a defendant even if DNA evidence was negative as long as the alleged victim had made a positive ID:

Table 3-18 summarizes results from the prosecutors. 62% said they were involved in deciding whether there was probable cause to support an arrest warrant. Of those who were involved, 91% said physical evidence testing results were an important factor in instances where the complainant could not make a good identification of the perpetrator. Only 8% said they would support an arrest warrant affidavit where the physical evidence results were negative or uninformative. But in cases where the complainant could make a good identification, 75% of the prosecutors said they would support an arrest warrant, even if the physical evidence analysis results were negative or uninformative.
http://www.uic.edu/pharmacy/depts/forensicsci/Sexual%20Assault%20Evidence.pdf

(I apologize in advance if the URL is too long. I've gotta learn how to do the snip url thing :doh: )

nanandjim
04-12-2006, 10:35 AM
I'm not sure what to believe any more. Last night I heard that there WAS DNA evidence found, but it didn't belong to anyone they tested, which basically was the entire team. So, we're back where we started from. I just don't see why she'd have a reason to lie. Apparently she didn't say anything to the dancer she left with either and that woman didn't know anything was wrong until she got to the store and made that call to 911.
Well, money could be a reason to lie. Who knows if the whole thing is a set-up?? If she didn't say anything to the other dancer, that is just plain weird. Wouldn't you be upset and say, "They raped me!! They raped me!!"

At first, I was inclined to believe this woman. Now, I don't know. My decision will probably be more solid when the grand jury returns its decision because they will be privy to all of the evidence.

nanandjim
04-12-2006, 10:41 AM
... There wasn't any DNA found in or on the body of Imette St. Guillen, was there?...
Geez...The Imette rape/murder is entirely different. The killer acted alone and had hours to wipe down the body and get rid of evidence.

In this case, you have a bunch of idiot college kids and a dancer. If it happened the way that this dancer said that it did, do you think that the kids actually thoroughly planned this, to include having time to put on condoms before they raped her in a crowded bathroom, with her fighting, kicking, screaming and losing her fake fingernails.

BTW, those fake fingernails can pop off at the drop of the hat--especially if she put them on herself.

I also have not decided one way or the other. I'll let the grand jury decide first.

Jeana (DP)
04-12-2006, 10:42 AM
Well, money could be a reason to lie. Who knows if the whole thing is a set-up?? If she didn't say anything to the other dancer, that is just plain weird. Wouldn't you be upset and say, "They raped me!! They raped me!!"

At first, I was inclined to believe this woman. Now, I don't know. My decision will probably be more solid when the grand jury returns its decision because they will be privy to all of the evidence.


Money from whom though? Do any of these kids have any money?

nanandjim
04-12-2006, 11:30 AM
Money from whom though? Do any of these kids have any money?
I'm thinking that their families may have money... Who knows how or what some people think?? I don't evenknow if I believe the story about that girl who claimed that Mike Tyson raped her. She sure made a lot of money off of him after his successful prosecution.

More times than not, I have seen that if you will follow the money trail, you will have your answer to why something happened...

Jeana (DP)
04-12-2006, 11:44 AM
I'm thinking that their families may have money... Who knows how or what some people think?? I don't evenknow if I believe the story about that girl who claimed that Mike Tyson raped her. She sure made a lot of money off of him after his successful prosecution.

More times than not, I have seen that if you will follow the money trail, you will have your answer to why something happened...


The families can't be held financially responsible for what these guys do. They're adults. Many of them may have huge student loans.

Tyson - sure. He had money. The girl who made the allegations about Kobe Bryant comes to mind, but I'm not even sure if she made the whole thing up.

nanandjim
04-12-2006, 11:47 AM
The families can't be held financially responsible for what these guys do. They're adults. Many of them may have huge student loans.

Tyson - sure. He had money. The girl who made the allegations about Kobe Bryant comes to mind, but I'm not even sure if she made the whole thing up.
What if the families are paying for these kids to go to school and claiming them as dependents on their income tax? Would this make a difference? I don't know the law. Also, this girl may not know the law either.

I also do not think that the Kobe Bryant girl made up her allegations. I believe that Kobe may have forced himself on this girl. However, I think the girl has some serious problems of her own. In any case, I can imagine that she made out like a bandit, with her settlement...

Summerskye1
04-12-2006, 11:52 AM
Geez...The Imette rape/murder is entirely different. The killer acted alone and had hours to wipe down the body and get rid of evidence.

In this case, you have a bunch of idiot college kids and a dancer. If it happened the way that this dancer said that it did, do you think that the kids actually thoroughly planned this, to include having time to put on condoms before they raped her in a crowded bathroom, with her fighting, kicking, screaming and losing her fake fingernails.

BTW, those fake fingernails can pop off at the drop of the hat--especially if she put them on herself.

I also have not decided one way or the other. I'll let the grand jury decide first.
Hey, I hear what you're saying. But wouldn't it be quicker and easier for the guys to put condoms on (even on the spur of the moment) than the time it would take this woman to create an imaginary yet plausibly realistic gang rape scenario on the spur of the moment? Putting on a condom seems way faster to me, if we are just looking at time.

And while I haven't personally researched the issue (:D ), I think most popular, single, good-looking college guys heading out for a night of drinking carry condoms in their wallets or their pants. I don't want to stereotype too badly, but if you were the kind of guy on campus who is on a revered sports team, handsome, popular, etc., and if you occasionally get the chance to have an unplanned, spur of the moment sexual experience with an attractive coed you just met at the bar who won't let you 'do anything' with her if you don't have a condom, then you might be more likely to make sure you've always got one handy.

I would guess it depends on the guy's feelings about condoms and on his perceived chances of 'getting lucky' on any given night.

Masterj
04-12-2006, 12:13 PM
Well, money could be a reason to lie. Who knows if the whole thing is a set-up?? If she didn't say anything to the other dancer, that is just plain weird. Wouldn't you be upset and say, "They raped me!! They raped me!!"

At first, I was inclined to believe this woman. Now, I don't know. My decision will probably be more solid when the grand jury returns its decision because they will be privy to all of the evidence.
I think it is very difficult to guess how you would react after being raped. Four hours after I was raped, I sat down and ate breakfast with my aunt and never uttered a word.

Wudge
04-12-2006, 01:00 PM
I'm not sure what to believe any more. Last night I heard that there WAS DNA evidence found, but it didn't belong to anyone they tested, which basically was the entire team. So, we're back where we started from. I just don't see why she'd have a reason to lie. Apparently she didn't say anything to the dancer she left with either and that woman didn't know anything was wrong until she got to the store and made that call to 911.


For those who have been maligned revenge can be very tasty, especially if the malignment was racial and took place in a racially-torn community like Durham.

Jeana (DP)
04-12-2006, 01:14 PM
For those who have been maligned revenge can be very tasty, especially if the malignment was racial and took place in a racially-torn community like Durham.


Didn't take long for Jesse Jackson to jump on the bandwagon, did it. LOL Duke may have its fair share of spoiled rich kids, but without the school, where would the community be? If they all go away today and close the school, the area won't be doing too good. I think they all just need to just get along. Does make me want to steer my son toward SMU though. :waitasec:

Wudge
04-12-2006, 01:15 PM
Money from whom though? Do any of these kids have any money?

Depending on the coverage, a family umbrella insurance policy -- lots of children from very well-heeled families attend Duke -- could well come into play in a civil suit. Of course, a civil suit would be handled on a contingent basis and would be nicely set-up by a criminal suit that costs the alleged victim: nothing.

Jeana (DP)
04-12-2006, 01:19 PM
Depending on the coverage, a family umbrella insurance policy -- lots of children from very well-heeled families attend Duke -- could well come into play in a civil suit. Of course, a civil suit would be handled on a contingent basis and would be nicely set-up by a criminal suit that costs the alleged victim: nothing.

I'm not so sure insurance covers gang rape, but then I don't normally handle those type of cases. We don't know about the three boys that she's accusing. They may be on scholarships. There are just too many unknowns for us to assume she's doing this for money. Since the coach quit and the school canceled the team's season, it already makes them look bad though, so that sure won't help matters.

Wudge
04-12-2006, 01:34 PM
Didn't take long for Jesse Jackson to jump on the bandwagon, did it. LOL Duke may have its fair share of spoiled rich kids, but without the school, where would the community be? If they all go away today and close the school, the area won't be doing too good. I think they all just need to just get along. Does make me want to steer my son toward SMU though. :waitasec:


It is well known that Jesse Jackson used the race card to extort money from corporations. His game (racket) was simple. He would ignore situations where a firm's percentage of blacks on its payroll was below the local black demographic percentage. So, money in his fist [his MIF policy] meant that he would be deflected to other corporate targets.

If our Justice Department had true ethics, Jackson would be wearing an orange jumpsuit for racketeering or, at the very least, extortion.

In a much less onerous but still profitable play: Do I think that Jesse Jackson would refer (hard steering) the alleged victim to one of his legal croonies for a big kickback fee? Color me in for a huge: YES.

As an after thought: Arn't we all real tired of this race-card BS? I sure am.

Jeana (DP)
04-12-2006, 01:37 PM
It is well known that Jesse Jackson used the race card to extort money from corporations. His game (racket) was simple. He would ignore situations where a firm's percentage of blacks on its payroll was below the local black demographic percentage. So, money in his fist [his MIF policy] meant that he would be deflected to other corporate targets.

If our Justice Department had true ethics, Jackson would be wearing an orange jumpsuit for racketeering or, at the very least, extortion.

In a much less onerous but still profitable play: Do I think that Jesse Jackson would refer (hard steering) the alleged victim to one of his legal croonies for a big kickback fee? Color me in for a huge: YES.

As an after thought: Arn't we all real tired of this race-card BS? I sure am.

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Wudge
04-12-2006, 01:56 PM
Geez...The Imette rape/murder is entirely different. The killer acted alone and had hours to wipe down the body and get rid of evidence.

In this case, you have a bunch of idiot college kids and a dancer. If it happened the way that this dancer said that it did, do you think that the kids actually thoroughly planned this, to include having time to put on condoms before they raped her in a crowded bathroom, with her fighting, kicking, screaming and losing her fake fingernails.

BTW, those fake fingernails can pop off at the drop of the hat--especially if she put them on herself.

I also have not decided one way or the other. I'll let the grand jury decide first.


My understanding is that the alleged victim has identified one of her alleged attackers.

If that is true and given that the D.A., Michael Nifong, has publically stated that he believes the woman and given a Durham grand jury -- where blacks comprise 45% of the population -- I would consider a criminal trial to be probable at this time.

Details
04-12-2006, 03:47 PM
Moneywise - I don't see where she profits either - nor where she has tried to (easy enough to put out an offer to drop charges - and the players would no doubt publicise that if their attorney was smart at all). But as a single mom, college student, not wealthy - I don't think she has the resources to make up a story for a payout a year or even a few months from now. I'm sure all this has disrupted her life a ton, and made money even harder to come by - that's not something a student, nor a single mom usually has the resources to do.

BhamMama
04-12-2006, 03:55 PM
then you might be more likely to make sure you've always got one handy.

I would guess it depends on the guy's feelings about condoms and on his perceived chances of 'getting lucky' on any given night.My husband of 19 years just piped up and said and I quote "We always had/have one ready, my feelings are, we always want to get lucky.' end quote.

He carried one in his wallet until there was a 'ring' where it rubbed on there, like a man who carries skoal in his back pocket wears a ring in his jeans. We were married, he knew he was gonna get lucky, but he kept that stupid thing as a reminder that yeah...I don't need this anymore.

Men can be a bit weird about those things....but yes, most guys carry one either in their car, their wallets or keep them in their houses. On that one 'off chance' kinda thing.

BhamMama
04-12-2006, 03:58 PM
As an after thought: Arn't we all real tired of this race-card BS? I sure am.Yes!!

And I'm surprised he found time to go do this when he was so busy the other day 'preaching and supporting' the New Orleans gov's debate in Atlanta. Man gets around don't he. So many pies, so few fingers!

Wudge
04-12-2006, 04:44 PM
Yes!!

And I'm surprised he found time to go do this when he was so busy the other day 'preaching and supporting' the New Orleans gov's debate in Atlanta. Man gets around don't he. So many pies, so few fingers!


Sure, he has spare time now, for Jesse is no longer doing his Rainbow Push Coalition. Or was it his Rainbow Pimp Coalition? I've always had trouble getting it right.

BillyGoatGruff
04-12-2006, 06:38 PM
We know so little of the victim but what we do know is so positive. Shes young, attractive, hard-working, courageous and quite clearly intelligent shes after all a college student. Shes also a mother of two. Im not sure what led her to exotic dancing but I suspect it has something to do with ambitions for the future not only her own but also for the future of her children. Im unsure how the Duke incident has scared her mentally and physically but one can only pray that the scars are not too deep; that she regains her position at Diamond Girls and once again forges ahead with her life plans. Honey, the odds are 99.99% that the girl was hooking, not simply dancing. It's part and parcel of the lifestyle, no matter what anyone tells you, especially if they're working through an escort agency.

The lack of DNA is a huge hurtle, because there should be SOMETHING. Saliva, blood, skin cells, hair follicles (with or without skin tags), latex "sheds", lubrication & spermicide traces, fabric fibers--ANYTHING. And if the time-stamped photos and videos show she arrived with pre-exisiting bruising... (and since every teenager and college boy seems to have a cell phone with picture/video capabilities, this is a very real possibility), then this turns into a whole other case.

BillyGoatGruff
04-12-2006, 06:48 PM
It has also been reported that she served her Country in
the Navy. Her father, ex husband and various others have described her
as loving, honest and caring.

In my opinion, she is much, much more then an "exotic dancer" as she is
being portrayed by the defense attorneys. I don't know what Diamond Girls is, but if it is the escort service I doubt she will return to a job that almost cost her, her life, do you?
Diamond Girls is an escort agency.
As to returning to work--most of the girls I knew working for escort agencies had been raped at least once and had been beaten, threatened with knives & guns, and otherwise harrased/assaulted numerous times. The money was too good, and they could justify the dangers re the returns. A good "worker" can make $500 a night, and many are "on call" with more than one agency.

nanandjim
04-12-2006, 06:49 PM
I think it is very difficult to guess how you would react after being raped. Four hours after I was raped, I sat down and ate breakfast with my aunt and never uttered a word.
I'm sorry for you, but this was not four hours later. This was immediately after the incident. I am leaning more towards these boys being railroaded. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty. This DA is behaving shamefully.

southernpixie
04-12-2006, 06:50 PM
I live in Raleigh/Durham so if you can imagine we are really bombarded with this! Anyhow, my husband and I were having dinner tonight and the news was on - of course, this was the lead story. After it was over my husband said, "I am just not sure about this one. If she was raped - well, ya know, there are degrees of rape." WTF? This is a man that I have been married to for 9 years. He then proceeded to say "Well, there is the 'no' (from the woman) and she is raped" - which he feels to be the lessor on the spectrum of rape and then there is the "Badly beaten and in ICU" rape which is at the opposite end of the spectrum.

Am I nuts or did my husband make a really stupid, uneducated, pompus, crass, stoneage comment??????? :banghead:

Hhmmmm, imagine - we haven't talked since then!:rolleyes:

nanandjim
04-12-2006, 06:51 PM
Didn't take long for Jesse Jackson to jump on the bandwagon, did it...
Has Jesse arrived?? I asked this at the beginning of the case. If he has arrived, I guess that there is enough press covering the case to make it worth his while. How long before Al Sharpton shows up?? Where's the NAACP and the ACLU?? They shouldn't be far behind...

BillyGoatGruff
04-12-2006, 06:52 PM
Money from whom though? Do any of these kids have any money?
Lacrosse is a rich man's sport. And Duke is a rich man's college.

Details
04-12-2006, 07:00 PM
I'm sorry for you, but this was not four hours later. This was immediately after the incident. I am leaning more towards these boys being railroaded. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty. This DA is behaving shamefully.I've had similar experiences. You're just so blown away by what happened, that you can't put it into words, you just run on autopilot and don't tell anyone what happened while you try to figure it out yourself. If you say it, then it's real - that's no help either. This woman is far from the only rape victim with that kind of response.

Details
04-12-2006, 07:02 PM
I live in Raleigh/Durham so if you can imagine we are really bombarded with this! Anyhow, my husband and I were having dinner tonight and the news was on - of course, this was the lead story. After it was over my husband said, "I am just not sure about this one. If she was raped - well, ya know, there are degrees of rape." WTF? This is a man that I have been married to for 9 years. He then proceeded to say "Well, there is the 'no' (from the woman) and she is raped" - which he feels to be the lessor on the spectrum of rape and then there is the "Badly beaten and in ICU" rape which is at the opposite end of the spectrum.

Am I nuts or did my husband make a really stupid, uneducated, pompus, crass, stoneage comment??????? :banghead:

Hhmmmm, imagine - we haven't talked since then!:rolleyes:Depends on what he means by that - there are spectrums of rape, I'd agree. However, if he thinks the lesser end of the spectrum isn't much of a crime, isn't really a horrible thing - yeah, then it's a stupid stoneage comment. If he's saying that the lower end is a serious crime, but the upper end is worse - that fits with what I believe too. But what with the "I am just not sure about this one" - sounds like he's saying it's probably not that serious, and he's dead wrong about that.

mic730
04-12-2006, 10:30 PM
It is well known that Jesse Jackson used the race card to extort money from corporations. His game (racket) was simple. He would ignore situations where a firm's percentage of blacks on its payroll was below the local black demographic percentage. So, money in his fist [his MIF policy] meant that he would be deflected to other corporate targets.

If our Justice Department had true ethics, Jackson would be wearing an orange jumpsuit for racketeering or, at the very least, extortion.

In a much less onerous but still profitable play: Do I think that Jesse Jackson would refer (hard steering) the alleged victim to one of his legal croonies for a big kickback fee? Color me in for a huge: YES.

As an after thought: Arn't we all real tired of this race-card BS? I sure am.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Yes, Yes, Yes.

Summerskye1
04-12-2006, 11:23 PM
Honey, the odds are 99.99% that the girl was hooking, not simply dancing. It's part and parcel of the lifestyle, no matter what anyone tells you, especially if they're working through an escort agency.

The lack of DNA is a huge hurtle, because there should be SOMETHING. Saliva, blood, skin cells, hair follicles (with or without skin tags), latex "sheds", lubrication & spermicide traces, fabric fibers--ANYTHING. And if the time-stamped photos and videos show she arrived with pre-exisiting bruising... (and since every teenager and college boy seems to have a cell phone with picture/video capabilities, this is a very real possibility), then this turns into a whole other case.
With respect the allegation that the AV was "hooking," forgive me for phrasing things this way but who cares?

With regard to your latter assertion that the lack of DNA is a huge hurdle, can you explain in terms of scientific probability the likelihood of finding a useable DNA sample on a rape victim that matches anyone other than the victim? From my experience and education, it was my understanding that it is quite common to find none of these things on a rape victim, despite plenty of other evidence of rape. If I am proven wrong, so be it, but I'd be interested in seeing any academic articles or reports that say that DNA evidence is recovered in the vast majority of early-reported rape cases.

kcnz
04-13-2006, 03:29 AM
It has also been reported that she served her Country in
the Navy. Her father, ex husband and various others have described her
as loving, honest and caring.

In my opinion, she is much, much more then an "exotic dancer" as she is
being portrayed by the defense attorneys. I don't know what Diamond Girls is, but if it is the escort service I doubt she will return to a job that almost cost her, her life, do you?
I wouldn't be surprised. As you point out she has been variously described as someone who is loving, honest and caring so perhaps something in the hospitality industry isn't too amazing.

Bee Charmer
04-13-2006, 07:42 AM
I've had similar experiences. You're just so blown away by what happened, that you can't put it into words, you just run on autopilot and don't tell anyone what happened while you try to figure it out yourself. If you say it, then it's real - that's no help either. This woman is far from the only rape victim with that kind of response.
I'm sorry too. It really doesn't require too much compassion
to realize if this young woman was raped the way she claims
she was, then strangled, beatened and kicked, she could indeed be
in shock and disorientated. Let's allow the system to work. Mr.
Nifong will present witnesses and evidence to the Grand Jury, then
they will decide. I am willing to abide by their decision after viewing
the actual evidence.

Jeana (DP)
04-13-2006, 08:47 AM
I'm going to ask you ALL to refrain from calling this woman a hooker. Frankly, I don't think that she was. BUT, even if she were, if what she says is true, it doesn't matter anyway. Rape is rape and let's keep our discussion to whether or not we think that part of the story is true. Thanks.

duke
04-13-2006, 09:58 AM
We know so little of the victim but what we do know is so positive. Shes young, attractive, hard-working, courageous and quite clearly intelligent shes after all a college student. Shes also a mother of two. Im not sure what led her to exotic dancing but I suspect it has something to do with ambitions for the future not only her own but also for the future of her children. Im unsure how the Duke incident has scared her mentally and physically but one can only pray that the scars are not too deep; that she regains her position at Diamond Girls and once again forges ahead with her life plans.

BEST POST YET!

BillyGoatGruff
04-13-2006, 03:48 PM
With respect the allegation that the AV was "hooking," forgive me for phrasing things this way but who cares?

With regard to your latter assertion that the lack of DNA is a huge hurdle, can you explain in terms of scientific probability the likelihood of finding a useable DNA sample on a rape victim that matches anyone other than the victim? From my experience and education, it was my understanding that it is quite common to find none of these things on a rape victim, despite plenty of other evidence of rape. If I am proven wrong, so be it, but I'd be interested in seeing any academic articles or reports that say that DNA evidence is recovered in the vast majority of early-reported rape cases.

I'm amused that posters who normally seem to view DNA as an important tool in solving crimes and getting people off death row suddenly view it as inconclusive in this case.

If DNA doesn't mean squat, then why bother doing it at all?

BillyGoatGruff
04-13-2006, 03:50 PM
I'm sorry too. It really doesn't require too much compassion
to realize if this young woman was raped the way she claims
she was, then strangled, beatened and kicked, she could indeed be
in shock and disorientated. Let's allow the system to work. Mr.
Nifong will present witnesses and evidence to the Grand Jury, then
they will decide. I am willing to abide by their decision after viewing
the actual evidence.
I don't doubt that it did happen--but I have even stronger doubts the guilty parties are the people she's accusing.

Jeana (DP)
04-13-2006, 03:51 PM
I don't doubt that it did happen--but I have even stronger doubts the guilty parties are the people she's accusing.


I'm anxious to hear more about the time stamped photos showing her injured when she arrived.

Details
04-13-2006, 03:59 PM
I'm amused that posters who normally seem to view DNA as an important tool in solving crimes and getting people off death row suddenly view it as inconclusive in this case.

If DNA doesn't mean squat, then why bother doing it at all?DNA - when present - means something. But an absence of information doesn't mean anything! Who here has said that a person should get off death row because their DNA was not at the crime scene?

It's no different than any kind of evidence - fingerprints, blood, DNA - when they are present they mean something, but their absence doesn't necessarily mean anything at all - and definitely not that a criminal who manages through intelligence or dumb luck not to leave them should get away when there is enough other evidence to convict.

Bee Charmer
04-13-2006, 04:28 PM
I don't doubt that it did happen--but I have even stronger doubts the guilty parties are the people she's accusing.I agree with you. We need the ones that actually did
something criminal. I really hope that some of the men there, who
have no legal liability, are helping catch the guilty ones.

Jeana (DP)
04-13-2006, 04:38 PM
I agree with you. We need the ones that actually did
something criminal. I really hope that some of the men there, who
have no legal liability, are helping catch the guilty ones.


What if the "guilty ones" have nothing to do with them? What if the "guilty ones" are known only to her? They said they have evidence that she looked like she had been beaten up when she arrived. How would she explain that?

kcnz
04-13-2006, 05:53 PM
I agree with you. We need the ones that actually did
something criminal. I really hope that some of the men there, who
have no legal liability, are helping catch the guilty ones.
Surely it couldn't be too hard. Three men with non-lubricated condoms; though sometimes I wonder how the police coped before the CSI culture came along.

Wudge
04-13-2006, 06:39 PM
I agree with you. We need the ones that actually did
something criminal. I really hope that some of the men there, who
have no legal liability, are helping catch the guilty ones.


Did I miss the part where their presumption of innocence ceased, because "guilty" has been determined?

Details
04-13-2006, 06:47 PM
Did I miss the part where their presumption of innocence ceased, because "guilty" has been determined?Only if I missed the part where this became a court of law, and all of us jurors who have to abide by the legal requirement of a presumption of innocence.

Wudge
04-13-2006, 07:02 PM
Only if I missed the part where this became a court of law, and all of us jurors who have to abide by the legal requirement of a presumption of innocence.


Can you tell me how "guilty" was determined?

Details
04-13-2006, 07:08 PM
Can you tell me how "guilty" was determined?Easy - there's been a crime, so someone is guilty of it. Maybe the law will never prove who. Maybe the case will never go to trial - but there was a crime, so there is at least one guilty party. In one scenario, the victim is the guilty party, if she is lying, and made a false police report. I don't believe that - but it's always possible. Guilty is determined by what I hear and what I think, and my experiences that lean me towards one conclusion or another about people. Until I'm given jury power to set someone's fate, it doesn't have to be anything stronger or more formal than that.

I understand that your position is that you believe innocent until proven guilty should apply to all statements from all people - but that's not the requirement, that's not what most are here to do - you keep repeating the point - I think everyone knows your position - doesn't mean I'm ever going to agree with it, or censor myself to make you happy or to avoid a comment about 'innocent until proven guilty'. I can read the info for myself, make up my own mind about who it guilty, and debate and discuss it here.

Wudge
04-13-2006, 07:33 PM
Easy - there's been a crime, so someone is guilty of it. Maybe the law will never prove who. Maybe the case will never go to trial - but there was a crime, so there is at least one guilty party. In one scenario, the victim is the guilty party, if she is lying, and made a false police report. I don't believe that - but it's always possible. Guilty is determined by what I hear and what I think, and my experiences that lean me towards one conclusion or another about people. Until I'm given jury power to set someone's fate, it doesn't have to be anything stronger or more formal than that.

I understand that your position is that you believe innocent until proven guilty should apply to all statements from all people - but that's not the requirement, that's not what most are here to do - you keep repeating the point - I think everyone knows your position - doesn't mean I'm ever going to agree with it, or censor myself to make you happy or to avoid a comment about 'innocent until proven guilty'. I can read the info for myself, make up my own mind about who it guilty, and debate and discuss it here.


I see: if someone "claims" they were raped, then a crime occurred. Apparently, I've also missed our time travel return to Salem, 1692.

Details
04-13-2006, 07:42 PM
I see: if someone "claims" they were raped, then a crime occurred. Apparently, I've also missed our time travel return to Salem, 1692.Yes, exactly. A crime occurred - guaranteed!

Read a bit more carefully, and you'll see that one of the possibilities for this crime is lying about the rape in my post above. The crime is either rape, or making false charges to police. If it is rape, it may be any one of several people. If it is lying, then it is the victim. Someone is guilty, and that person should be charged and held accountable for their actions.

Now, with what the medical people said - I'm of the belief the rape did happen, so it's not only a lie - there is a rapist out there. Could be it's not someone she accused, in which case both she and the rapist are guilty - one of rape, one of false accusations. Could be it's as she said, and it's several of the lacrosse players. And so far, that's what I'm going with happened, until I have something more solid than a defense attorney's statements that he has exculpatory evidence to show. So I believe some of the lacrosse players are guilty - and no matter what did or did not happen at that party, they're all a bit on the slimy side for stonewalling police, with the exception of anyone who was silently cooperating, and with the exception of the one who is a lot on the slimy side for that sadistic, psychotic email.

caffeinatd
04-13-2006, 07:45 PM
Interesting new info from the 6pm Local news...
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=triangle&id=4082683

also, a new email surfaced...supposedly sent from Duke, but dated 4/14? Not sure I got all of that info....

Wudge
04-13-2006, 08:25 PM
Yes, exactly. A crime occurred - guaranteed!

Read a bit more carefully, and you'll see that one of the possibilities for this crime is lying about the rape in my post above. The crime is either rape, or making false charges to police. If it is rape, it may be any one of several people. If it is lying, then it is the victim. Someone is guilty, and that person should be charged and held accountable for their actions.

Now, with what the medical people said - I'm of the belief the rape did happen, so it's not only a lie - there is a rapist out there. Could be it's not someone she accused, in which case both she and the rapist are guilty - one of rape, one of false accusations. Could be it's as she said, and it's several of the lacrosse players. And so far, that's what I'm going with happened, until I have something more solid than a defense attorney's statements that he has exculpatory evidence to show. So I believe some of the lacrosse players are guilty - and no matter what did or did not happen at that party, they're all a bit on the slimy side for stonewalling police, with the exception of anyone who was silently cooperating, and with the exception of the one who is a lot on the slimy side for that sadistic, psychotic email.

A women who claims she was raped does not establish that a rape (crime) occurred. Likewise, if a rape trial does not result in a "guilty" verdict, that does not establish that the women committed a crime either.

Currently, a plea of "guilty' or a "guilty verdict" is used to determine if a crime took place.

Details
04-13-2006, 08:36 PM
A women who claims she was raped does not establish that a rape (crime) occurred. Likewise, if a rape trial does not result in a "guilty" verdict, that does not establish that the women committed a crime either.

Currently, a plea of "guilty' or a "guilty verdict" is used to determine if a crime took place.No, a crime can happen without a trial, without a witness, without the police ever taking part. How do you see this case without a crime? The woman said she was raped, but, wasn't raped (since you say there could be no crime), but somehow she also didn't lie to police and make a false report? How do you come up with no crime?

A trial may not establish which crime took place - too often a criminal is let off - but that doesn't mean the crime did not happen.

And, likewise, a plea of "Guilty" or a "guilty verdict" doesn't mean a crime did happen! People plead guilty to crimes they did not commit, a person can be charged with a crime, found guilty, then later it can be found that the crime never happened at all! This is reality, not the court system. I don't care if the courts get it wrong, what I'm interested in is what really happened, then, from there, hoping that the courts can reflect reality in their verdicts and appropriate punishment. But if they fail, that doesn't change reality - the crime still happened, the victim is still damaged or dead, the criminal is still a criminal.

Details
04-13-2006, 08:42 PM
We're talking about different worlds - you seem to want me to talk as if the legal, court world was the only real one, but I believe reality, truth is the most important issue, and the courts are only a flawed instrument trying to get at the truth. For you, guilt or innocence waits until a judge bangs a gavel, it seems.

For me, guilt or innocence happened long ago, the instant the crime was committed, and here on this forum we attempt to figure out who is really guilty in the real world, then look at how the lawyers try to convict or release the guilty or innocents caught up in the court world.

Wudge
04-13-2006, 08:50 PM
We're talking about different worlds

SNIP



Yes, from here on earth, it's the first star on the right that leads straight to Neverland.

(chuckle)

Details
04-13-2006, 08:57 PM
Yes, from here on earth, it's the first star on the right that leads straight to Neverland.

(chuckle)And if Neverland is a reality that some prefer not to see, hiding behind rules and regulations - or if Neverland is a fantasy land that isn't real - we each have our own perceptions.

Summerskye1
04-13-2006, 09:40 PM
FWIW, I agree 100% with what you've been saying, Details. :clap: I respect your patience and your ability to keep an open mind while we wait for more evidence to be publicly revealed.

kcnz
04-13-2006, 10:56 PM
What I find most shocking is how having brutalised, strangled and raped her with non-lubricated condoms - and hence leaving no evidence - they then hurled racial slurs at her. The Duke boys treated her worse than they would garbage. I have no respect for them whatsoever.

kcnz
04-14-2006, 03:18 AM
This case is just so confusing. Now we learn that one of the first police officers to see her, described her as - "passed out drunk". The Duke crew must have raped her when she was drunk!!! No wonder she had so much trouble identifying the men in the non-lubricated condoms.

Wudge
04-14-2006, 08:25 AM
This case is just so confusing. Now we learn that one of the first police officers to see her, described her as - "passed out drunk". The Duke crew must have raped her when she was drunk!!! No wonder she had so much trouble identifying the men in the non-lubricated condoms.

Dreamscape images are never clear.

Bee Charmer
04-14-2006, 08:57 AM
Interesting new info from the 6pm Local news...
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=triangle&id=4082683

also, a new email surfaced...supposedly sent from Duke, but dated 4/14? Not sure I got all of that info....
Dan Abrams discussed this email on his show yesterday.
He had a copy. The title of it was "sorry guys" and it went on to
say that he was going to the police and telling them everything
that went on that night, just as your link states.

The discussion that ensued with Abram's panel was whether this
was something the police did to smoke the men out. I checked the
Abrams Show transcripts and they may not be available until
Monday, if anyone wants to read everything discussed.

Details
04-14-2006, 02:32 PM
Interesting... wonder what it is. Is there a link anywhere to exactly what the email says?


News reports that the police are searching rooms today - because of that email, or just part of the process?

Jeana (DP)
04-14-2006, 02:43 PM
from the link:

Sources tell Eyewitness News that the e-mail is dated for tomorrow, Friday, April 14, leading some to believe that it is fake.



Interesting. :confused:

Details
04-14-2006, 02:52 PM
But why make it an obvious fake if it is the police... or anyone else doing it? It's just weird, the whole thing!

Jeana (DP)
04-14-2006, 03:00 PM
I wish I had the answer. If she was falling down drunk, as the police officer states, she's not going to be the best witness on the stand during a trial. If this comes down to a "he said, she said" situation, her credibility will definately come into play since there doesn't seem to be DNA evidence. If there are witnesses (and in a house that small with so many people around), I would expect them to be all we're going to have to help getting to the bottom of this whole thing.

Details
04-14-2006, 03:06 PM
I wish I had the answer. If she was falling down drunk, as the police officer states, she's not going to be the best witness on the stand during a trial. If this comes down to a "he said, she said" situation, her credibility will definately come into play since there doesn't seem to be DNA evidence. If there are witnesses (and in a house that small with so many people around), I would expect them to be all we're going to have to help getting to the bottom of this whole thing.I hope there are witnesses who will speak, won't try to stonewall and get out of this. Lots of stories going around, some evidence, but enough details are missing for almost anything to be true.

I've wondered about the police officer - he said he found her passed out drunk in a car - but did he say falling down drunk? The reason I'm wondering is if she was just in the car, there was a smell of alcohol, and she was non-responsive - that could be a state of shock rather than drunk. I'm sure the medical examination has her blood alcohol level, so that will be a question that can be answered for certain. It's just his first statement back to the dispatch about what type of call he found it to be, on first impression, and that can be mistaken.

Summerskye1
04-14-2006, 05:13 PM
I've been wondering how much the police officer's first impression may have been based upon what he was expecting to find based upon the nature of the dispatch. Wasn't he responding to a report of a possibly-intoxicated woman refusing to get out of someone else's car?

I'm not trying to argue that she was, in fact, sober, since we just don't know, but there are just so many unknowns...

If she was looking as beaten-up as the defense attorneys are saying she was when she arrived at the party, did the officer notice her injuries? Did he talk to her about them? Did he arrest her? Bring her home? Bring her to the hospital? Were any sobriety tests administered? Did he actually smell alcohol on her? If so, did he smell it on her breath, or was it just on her clothing, shoes, or hair? Were his initial impressions later verified by chemical tests taken during the medical exam?

I wish they would just make all of the evidence public at once instead of allowing little bits to trickle out piece by piece. I realize that the authorities don't have much choice when there's a valid FOIA request, but this is just so frustrating. My sympathies really go out to the innocent(s) here, whoever they are. And to the community that is thrown into turmoil in the meantime.

Jeana (DP)
04-14-2006, 05:28 PM
I hope there are witnesses who will speak, won't try to stonewall and get out of this. Lots of stories going around, some evidence, but enough details are missing for almost anything to be true.

I've wondered about the police officer - he said he found her passed out drunk in a car - but did he say falling down drunk? The reason I'm wondering is if she was just in the car, there was a smell of alcohol, and she was non-responsive - that could be a state of shock rather than drunk. I'm sure the medical examination has her blood alcohol level, so that will be a question that can be answered for certain. It's just his first statement back to the dispatch about what type of call he found it to be, on first impression, and that can be mistaken.


Oops, not "falling down" drunk. Here's the quote:

The officer gave the dispatcher the police code for an intoxicated person and said the woman was unconscious. When asked whether she needed medical help, the officer said: "She's breathing and appears to be fine. She's not in distress. She's just passed-out drunk."



my bad! :D

Details
04-14-2006, 05:38 PM
Oops, not "falling down" drunk. Here's the quote:

The officer gave the dispatcher the police code for an intoxicated person and said the woman was unconscious. When asked whether she needed medical help, the officer said: "She's breathing and appears to be fine. She's not in distress. She's just passed-out drunk."



my bad! :DNo problem. I was just wondering if there was another report that had more detail that I'd missed. This report sounds a lot like his preliminary assessment, which police often give to the dispatcher to let them know what is going on. Maybe his final assessment was the same, maybe not.

kcnz
04-14-2006, 06:22 PM
No problem. I was just wondering if there was another report that had more detail that I'd missed. This report sounds a lot like his preliminary assessment, which police often give to the dispatcher to let them know what is going on. Maybe his final assessment was the same, maybe not.Maybe she sobered up! IMO it doesn't really matter whether she was drunk, drugged or whatever. What really matters is what happened to her at 610 N. Buchanan.

Details
04-14-2006, 06:26 PM
Maybe she sobered up! IMO it doesn't really matter whether she was drunk, drugged or whatever. What really matters is what happened to her at 610 N. Buchanan.It matters a little about whether the players story is credible or not, since they say she is drunk. Doesn't change anything if her story is true, but if she was completely sober, it puts a lie out there, and in the players main defense point so far.

Summerskye1
04-14-2006, 06:34 PM
This is all so odd.

According to the Abrams Report on MSNBC right now, there are photos of the AV from right outside the boys' house that night and in the photos she looks drunk. Don't take my word for it, because my hearing and memory are certainly not perfect, but it sounded to me like there's a photo of her lying on the steps, another photo of her leg hanging out of the car after having been carried to the car by one of the players, a photo making it appear as though her nail polish has smeared onto part of the railing, a photo of her wearing her bodysuit and one shoe...and that according to the time stamps on the photos, they only leave a 7-minute window of time for a crime to have occured indoors.

If I heard all of this correctly and if these photos exist and are accurate, then why weren't the players more cooperative from the start?

kcnz
04-14-2006, 06:59 PM
and that according to the time stamps on the photos, they only leave a 7-minute window of time for a crime to have occured indoors.

It might have only been 7 minutes but it might have seemed a lot longer to the rape victim - sort of like how a road accident can appear to happen in slow motion.

Details
04-14-2006, 07:04 PM
Why only 7 minutes - photos taken before and after she arrived? One thing I've been wondering about the photos is how accurate the timestamp is, and whether it could show her after the attack, rather than before. I guess they didn't show the photos? Wonder why?

Doesn't seem to be a reason to be so mysterious with exculpatory evidence, I'm sure the DA is aware of it, and if he's trying to discredit it, he'll already be working on it, so why the big secret? Or is my big nose showing again?

kcnz
04-14-2006, 07:27 PM
Why only 7 minutes - photos taken before and after she arrived? One thing I've been wondering about the photos is how accurate the timestamp is, and whether it could show her after the attack, rather than before. I guess they didn't show the photos? Wonder why?
Apparently the timestamps agree with the time seen on a student's watch. I guess it is back to the time compression theory.
Three men with 7 minutes - that doesn't give them a lot of time - just over 2 minutes each - but then they are young.
The police apparently still believe that a rape took place as suggested by their latest attempt to interview the players.

Details
04-14-2006, 07:43 PM
Interesting. I wonder when they'll let some of those pictures out. Sounds odd - I can't recall ever being able to read a watch in a photo - but if they got lucky enough to get a few, or were able to read it through enhancement, that helps the timeline quite a bit.

drtee
04-15-2006, 02:22 AM
I'm coming to this discussion late (and hello to anyone who remembers me from Justice Watch days), but I did hear tonight that the athletes are from all over. Nancy Grace mentioned specifically New York, New Jersey, and Connecticutt. So they aren't racists because they're Southern.

I also balk at this generalization. I've lived mostly in the South (or Southwest) and also travel a lot, and I agree that racism is everywhere. It may surface in slightly different ways, but there is just as much racism (specifically against blacks) in Boston and Detroit as there is in Baton Rouge and Dallas.

Does anyone know if all the Lacrosse team members are white? I assume so, as it's a sport of the affluent, old money sort.

Wudge
04-15-2006, 09:57 AM
I'm coming to this discussion late (and hello to anyone who remembers me from Justice Watch days), but I did hear tonight that the athletes are from all over. Nancy Grace mentioned specifically New York, New Jersey, and Connecticutt. So they aren't racists because they're Southern.

I also balk at this generalization. I've lived mostly in the South (or Southwest) and also travel a lot, and I agree that racism is everywhere. It may surface in slightly different ways, but there is just as much racism (specifically against blacks) in Boston and Detroit as there is in Baton Rouge and Dallas.

Does anyone know if all the Lacrosse team members are white? I assume so, as it's a sport of the affluent, old money sort.


Since we are now doing the race card game, having lived in: PA, NY, FL, TX, CA. NC, and GA, my assessment is it that there is just as much racism from blacks against whites as the reverse, and, in my mind, now even more so in southern states.

P.S. 46 of the 47 players are white.

nanandjim
04-15-2006, 10:33 AM
...there is just as much racism from blacks against whites as the reverse...
I think that there is MORE racism from blacks against whites. However, I am white. Therefore, my opinion doesn't matter... :rolleyes:

P.S. I have lived in many states myself, to include MD, VA, FL, AZ, HI, MS, AL and NY. I have seen prejudice on all sides of the fence. Try living and/or getting a job in Hawaii and being Caucasian. You will then see what it is like to be a "minority." The Japanese run the place, and they stick together.

Wudge
04-15-2006, 10:49 AM
I think that there is MORE racism from blacks against whites. However, I am white. Therefore, my opinion doesn't matter... :rolleyes:

P.S. I have lived in many states myself, to include MD, VA, FL, AZ, HI, MS, AL and NY. I have seen prejudice on all sides of the fence. Try living and/or getting a job in Hawaii and being Caucasian. You will then see what it is like to be a "minority." The Japanese run the place, and they stick together.


Setting the record straight, racism is natural -- as birds of a feather stick together -- and has been with us since the dawn of man. And it will be with us until there is no more than one race, whatever form that might take.

What is relatively new is the recent intense play and effects of the reverse race card thoughout American society, including, and perhaps especially so, in our courtrooms and, particularly, in the jury selection process.

I will refer and evidence: O.J.'s trial, Michael Peterson's trial in Durham, Michael Jackson's trial, Kobe Bryant's near trial, and Jayson Williams recent partial acquittal, all of which were, in my opinion, race affected. And this case has the potential to be a race blockbuster as well, either in the form of Tawana Brawley or on its own strong racial overtones in Durham.

kcnz
04-15-2006, 05:13 PM
The accuser now claims that she may have been slipped a date-rape drug by one of the Lacrosse players - presumably by one of the men who later wore non-lubricated condoms! It may explain why the mother-of-two appeared drunk.

Sadly the lust white men have for black women is well-known. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12305991/

drtee
04-15-2006, 05:57 PM
I don't see a race card being played here, as the alleged perps are white. Now, if at some point they are charged of a hate crime, then race becomes more of an issue. I was responding to the matter of race in that I had heard on tv that the jocks were angry that the stripper was black, and that they wanted a white one. That's when the name calling began--allegedly.

As for racisim being everywhere, it is indeed, but that doesn't mean that we should become complacent about it. We should be vigilant about racism in ourselves as well as in others. If you've heard that blacks cannot be racist, the explanation for that is that the definition of racism being used in such arguments is that it must come from a position of power. Therefore, the argument goes, the oppressed cannot be accused of racisim toward the opporessor. Other forms of hatred, contempt, and anger, but not racism. Granted, that is a very specific definition of racism, but I thought I'd explain it, as I used to hear the argument and it didn't make sense to me at first, since clearly some black people hate white people.

kcnz
04-15-2006, 10:05 PM
I don't see a race card being played here, as the alleged perps are white. Now, if at some point they are charged of a hate crime, then race becomes more of an issue. I was responding to the matter of race in that I had heard on tv that the jocks were angry that the stripper was black, and that they wanted a white one. That's when the name calling began--allegedly.

As for racisim being everywhere, it is indeed, but that doesn't mean that we should become complacent about it. We should be vigilant about racism in ourselves as well as in others. If you've heard that blacks cannot be racist, the explanation for that is that the definition of racism being used in such arguments is that it must come from a position of power. Therefore, the argument goes, the oppressed cannot be accused of racisim toward the opporessor. Other forms of hatred, contempt, and anger, but not racism. Granted, that is a very specific definition of racism, but I thought I'd explain it, as I used to hear the argument and it didn't make sense to me at first, since clearly some black people hate white people.
Thank you dtree. Very informative.

mssheila
04-15-2006, 10:33 PM
Sadly the lust white men have for black women is well-known. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12305991/
A little O/T here, but that article, IMHO is absurd. What makes any woman, regardless of your color, think that YOUR race is singled out and ogled and objectified more than any other race of women? I'm white, and men stare at me on the dance floor, just like the woman in the article talks about. However, it would never occur to me to think that they were "looking at me like they want to own me" just because I'm dancing and they might find that sexy- or whatever. They look at you like they want you... for all kinds of things. I found that article offensive.

There is no race of women that is singled out to this kind of behavior from men. To suggest that only black women are treated that way is just.... well, it kind of pisses me off.

concernedperson
04-15-2006, 10:48 PM
The men that are abusive attack every woman. Whether they are black or white.We have to step away from racist thinking on this because it is not inductive thinking. You have to think further.What is the provocation? What is the pattern? What is her pattern? We cannot offer up blanket statements until if and when there are facts. This is a very confusing case. I am not sure what everyone wants. I hope it isn't about sports teams and rather a bonified case of abuse. But, I am not really onboard with a lot right now.

Bobbisangel
04-16-2006, 12:16 AM
I will never say that I think a woman is lying when she says that she has been raped. I think that rape has to be the most horrible thing that could happen to a female besides murder. I think that there are rapist that have walked out of court free men..like the Kennedy cousin...Smith.

I'm surprised that any women get checked over and press charges when they have been raped. Even though it isn't their fault they are just drug through the mud. The fact that this young lady was a dancer has already put a shadow over her. I doubt very much that she planned to do anything but dance for those guys. There were a ton of guys there. Because she dances it doesn't make her a bad person. It looks to me like she was working a job that she could make the most money at in order to take care of her kids and go to college. This young woman had plans to better her life or she wouldn't have been going to college. Her plate was full being a mother...keeping her home up...going to college....studying...and then dancing.

There was another dancer with this gal. What does she have to say about something happening? Was it the other dancer that gave this gal a ride to a store? It is my understanding that this gal left that house without her purse...the money from dancing....a shoe...and anything else she had taken in with her.

I'm wondering if those guys didn't rape her with objects. I hear they threatened to use a broom handle. It wouldn't surprise me if she wasn't raped with objects. If the guys were drunk some of them might have thought using objects was a big laugh. Something did some damage according to her pelvic exam. Objects don't leave DNA and the guys probably thought it was a riot.

This gal is supposed to be a professional dancer. Why would she go to a house to dance and be drunk and all beat up? If that was the case and someone complained to her boss she would lose her job. It doesn't seem to me that she can afford to lose her job.

And why aren't those guys talking? If nothing happened there then they don't have anything to worry about. The other gal should be able to verify. We know that they aren't all guilty of something. There were to many of them for all of them to even stand around watching. I'll bet the majority of them don't know what happened or weren't aware that something was taking place if it did. Probably just a small group of guys that are on the wild side made a decision and then acted on it.

kcnz
04-16-2006, 12:50 AM
I'm wondering if those guys didn't rape her with objects. I hear they threatened to use a broom handle. It wouldn't surprise me if she wasn't raped with objects. If the guys were drunk some of them might have thought using objects was a big laugh. Something did some damage according to her pelvic exam. Objects don't leave DNA and the guys probably thought it was a riot.I believe she claims that at least one of the players orally raped her. Now I suppose it is possible she had her eyes closed. She must have peeped somewhere along the line as she claims that the black guy didn't rape her.

Details
04-16-2006, 03:37 PM
This is a really good bit of info - the defense has released their detailed timeline of what happened:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12335371/site/newsweek/

One other bit - the attorney for the 2nd dancer does not agree that the timeline is accurate, and says she has always been cooperating with the DA (contrary to a few rumors on here - so far as you can trust what a defense attorney says about their client).

Another bit - sounds like the defense is even saying, or at least not countering that the broomstick was threatened during the dancers routines. It's part of the timeline.

kcnz
04-16-2006, 04:18 PM
This is a really good bit of info - the defense has released their detailed timeline of what happened:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12335371/site/newsweek/


Threatening with a broomstick??? According to the article one of the players suggested she use it as a sex toy. I'm not sure that is "threatening".

kcnz
04-16-2006, 04:59 PM
The men that are abusive attack every woman. Whether they are black or white.We have to step away from racist thinking on this because it is not inductive thinking. You have to think further.What is the provocation? What is the pattern? What is her pattern? We cannot offer up blanket statements until if and when there are facts. This is a very confusing case. I am not sure what everyone wants. I hope it isn't about sports teams and rather a bonified case of abuse. But, I am not really onboard with a lot right now.We have to take a step away from racist thinking? - well perhaps you could explain this British article which seems to imply that not only is race a factor for both perpetrators and victims - but also seemingly one that the police don't want us to know about. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/01/14/nrape14.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/01/14/ixhome.html Gang rape it seems is the real hush rape.
PS I'm not sure what you mean by inductive?

drtee
04-16-2006, 09:52 PM
If she is using it correctly, and I think she is, inductive means reasoning from the details to arrive at generalizations rather than the other way around. For example, looking at the specifics of the case to come up with a conclusion and motive rather than starting with the assumption that race is an issue, that white men want to rape black women, etc.

That being said, I think that although race is not always a factor, surely sometimes it is. Rape is an act of violence, of anger and hatred, so a racist white male might be more likely to rape a black woman than a white woman. He might see white women as worthy of respect, but he might see black women as objects.

kcnz
04-16-2006, 11:12 PM
If she is using it correctly, and I think she is, inductive means reasoning from the details to arrive at generalizations rather than the other way around. For example, looking at the specifics of the case to come up with a conclusion and motive rather than starting with the assumption that race is an issue, that white men want to rape black women, etc.

That being said, I think that although race is not always a factor, surely sometimes it is. Rape is an act of violence, of anger and hatred, so a racist white male might be more likely to rape a black woman than a white woman. He might see white women as worthy of respect, but he might see black women as objects.
According to the link I provided in London some 49% of gang-rapes were committed by men of African/Caribbean appearance and 13% by men of Pakistani/Indian appearance. White women accounted for 59% of victims. Would it be possible to induct something out of these figures?

Wudge
04-17-2006, 09:12 AM
Thank you dtree. Very informative.


I guess you have not been watching the media's reporting from Durham (45% black), which has showed upset and/or enraged black citizens -- some of whom did not know the alleged victim. Of course, the alleged victim saying that her alleged attackers hurled racial slurs at her did not help either.

Jeana (DP)
04-17-2006, 10:00 AM
The accuser now claims that she may have been slipped a date-rape drug by one of the Lacrosse players - presumably by one of the men who later wore non-lubricated condoms! It may explain why the mother-of-two appeared drunk.

Sadly the lust white men have for black women is well-known. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12305991/


Well they need to make up their minds. Either they were mad because a black stripper showed up and they wanted a white stripper or "the lust that white men have for black women is well-known." Can't be both. :confused:

Jeana (DP)
04-17-2006, 10:03 AM
If she is using it correctly, and I think she is, inductive means reasoning from the details to arrive at generalizations rather than the other way around. For example, looking at the specifics of the case to come up with a conclusion and motive rather than starting with the assumption that race is an issue, that white men want to rape black women, etc.

That being said, I think that although race is not always a factor, surely sometimes it is. Rape is an act of violence, of anger and hatred, so a racist white male might be more likely to rape a black woman than a white woman. He might see white women as worthy of respect, but he might see black women as objects.

I don't think they raped her (IF THEY IN FACT DID SO) because she was black. I tend to think they thought of "strippers" as objects - regardless of the color of their skin.

Wudge
04-17-2006, 11:10 AM
I don't think they raped her (IF THEY IN FACT DID SO) because she was black. I tend to think they thought of "strippers" as objects - regardless of the color of their skin.


Does LE have a timeline that brackets when this alleged gang rape occurred?

kcnz
04-17-2006, 04:34 PM
Well they need to make up their minds. Either they were mad because a black stripper showed up and they wanted a white stripper or "the lust that white men have for black women is well-known." Can't be both. :confused:
According to the paper when they hired "the victim" no colour was specified. The dancer unfortunately was reputed to be overweight - and this may have been a factor in her less than raptuous reception. So if there was a rape - they raped the fat one. As for the article re: white men's lust for black women - I'm only the messenger. The article I believed reflected the views of young African-American women. No one seems to have argued against it. Where is inductive logic when you need it most?

Boatswain'sMate
04-17-2006, 04:48 PM
I just saw on Abrams that they had handed down 24 or so indictments over this case, and none of the names on the list were Duke lacrosse players but that there could also be sealed (or secret??) indictments. I'm not following the case, so if I'm wrong here, sorry. Just a heads up.

caffeinatd
04-17-2006, 05:18 PM
2 of the players were indicted, the indictments are sealed, it is not known which of the players, when they will be arrested, or what they are charged with..local news info

kcnz
04-17-2006, 05:57 PM
2 of the players were indicted, the indictments are sealed, it is not known which of the players, when they will be arrested, or what they are charged with..local news info
What has happened to the mysterious third man???

Details
04-17-2006, 06:01 PM
I just saw on Abrams that they had handed down 24 or so indictments over this case, and none of the names on the list were Duke lacrosse players but that there could also be sealed (or secret??) indictments. I'm not following the case, so if I'm wrong here, sorry. Just a heads up.Actually, the grand jury handed down 24 indictments - not about this case. It sounded like it was just the end of this grand jury's time, and they issued the indictments for all the cases they were asked to consider - not just this case.

Details
04-17-2006, 06:15 PM
This has some interesting info, that seems to make some of the pieces fit together:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12357584/site/newsweek/
She has offered new details that suggest the alleged victim might have taken or been given some drug at the party.....When asked about the alleged victims evident intoxication the night of the party, District Attorney Mike Nifong told NEWSWEEK several weeks ago that her impaired state was not necessarily voluntary. Refusing to speak about the evidence in this case specifically, Nifong, in retrospect, now appears to have been offering a clue: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/17/national/main1501273.shtml
At 12:03:57, the girls appeared to be leaving the room, Regan reports. The defense says they had finished dancing, and her right shoe was on the floor.

...The next photo Regan saw of the alleged victim was taken at 12:30:12. The woman was on the back porch. In a photo reportedly taken less than a minute later, she's seen with only one shoe and seemed to be smiling.

In a photo taken at 12:37:58 the alleged victim is lying down. It looks like she fell, Regan reports. According to Regan, there appear to be new bruises on her backside and scratches on her legs. In another set of photos, taken immediately after the fall, there are pink splotches on the stair railing. The defense believes those splotches are from nail polish. When the alleged victim fell, her freshly painted nails hit the railing, attorneys say. ...
However, CBS News legal analyst Wendy Murphy tells The Early Show co-anchor Rene Syler that "if you really look at the photographs, they provide a 27-minute gap, which is exactly the amount of time the victim says she was in the bathroom being raped by three of these guys."
...Regan reports that the defense, however, argues the woman was painting her nails in the bathroom during that period. Yeah... right, painting her nails for 27 minutes - that's an alibi???!!!??? And at least the 2nd dancer, and maybe the DA are suggesting she was slipped some type of drug - a date rape drug - that explains why she seems to be totally wasted afterwards.

The defense is using the photos as a timeline and claiming there was only 7 minutes unaccounted for - but to believe that, you have to ignore the completely undoccumented time when she was in the bathroom she claims to have been raped in, at the time she claims to have been raped - and they say she was painting her nails. Not that it's impossible - it's just not an alibi like the defense attorneys have been ummmm, painting it as.

Details
04-17-2006, 06:35 PM
Some other interesting tidbits in here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12289760/
Earlier, the exotic dancer identified two players with 100 percent certainty and a third at 90 percent as having raped her at a party last month, ABC News reported Monday, citing what Durham County prosecutors told the players' attorneys. The tape was recorded April 3, three weeks after the alleged sexual assault, ABC News reported. On the tape, the guard says she called 911 after a driver of a car entered the grocery store and said that a woman the alleged victim refused to get out of her car.
The guard said the driver said she picked up the alleged victim, whom she had never met, after hearing people yell racial slurs at her as she was walking down the street, ABC News reported.

The guard further says on the tape that she smelled alcohol on the driver , but not the alleged victim, and that the alleged victim was unable to talk, ABC News said. So - our mother/college student/exotic dancer was indeed able to identify two of the guys, and not absolutely certain about the 3rd. And while she acted drunk, and was unable to talk, there was no smell of alcohol on her. Sure sounds consistient with date rape drug or something to me.

concernedperson
04-17-2006, 06:42 PM
Some other interesting tidbits in here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12289760/
So - our mother/college student/exotic dancer was indeed able to identify two of the guys, and not absolutely certain about the 3rd. And while she acted drunk, and was unable to talk, there was no smell of alcohol on her. Sure sounds consistient with date rape drug or something to me.

Good catch!

Boatswain'sMate
04-17-2006, 06:42 PM
Actually, the grand jury handed down 24 indictments - not about this case. It sounded like it was just the end of this grand jury's time, and they issued the indictments for all the cases they were asked to consider - not just this case.

Ah. Well that certainly makes more sense!

kcnz
04-17-2006, 06:47 PM
Some other interesting tidbits in here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12289760/
So - our mother/college student/exotic dancer was indeed able to identify two of the guys, and not absolutely certain about the 3rd. And while she acted drunk, and was unable to talk, there was no smell of alcohol on her. Sure sounds consistient with date rape drug or something to me.
She seems pretty consistent to me. Now this according to the paper - Charlotte Observer - she's an adultress, she's a liar, she's a thief, she's a stripper and prostitute - last known employer being the Allure Escort Agency - she's a convicted felon. Even the Navy didn't want her - general discharge not honourable. She even struggles with numbers - one penis, two penis, three penis - it's not that hard. Opps almost forgot - she's a loving and caring mother of two. Just bringing up the point that there may be a question of credibility here. Some people are more credulous than others.

Details
04-17-2006, 06:58 PM
She seems pretty consistent to me. Now this according to the paper - Charlotte Observer - she's an adultress, she's a liar, she's a thief, she's a stripper and prostitute - last known employer being the Allure Escort Agency - she's a convicted felon. Even the Navy didn't want her - general discharge not honourable. She even struggles with numbers - one penis, two penis, three penis - it's not that hard. Opps almost forgot - she's a loving and caring mother of two. Just bringing up the point that there may be a question of credibility here. Some people are more credulous than others.Hey, she's not the one saying she didn't smell of alcohol, the security guard who found her, called police, and if you read the link is generally pretty hostile to her, is the one saying that the victim did not smell of alcohol. It's not her credibility, you have to decide the security guard here also decided to lie. The pictures that the lacrosse team took - those are the photos that show new injuries to her after the point when she says she was raped, and have a big gap right when she said it happened. The medical examiner - how do you convince them to go along with the scam?

These reports dealt with a bunch of things that many here have questioned her on - "How can she not be able to identify the guys herself?" - Well - she can, and did. "She was obviously drunk - hurts credibility" - hmmm - didn't smell of alcohol but was passed out - and the other dancer says she was sober when they started, up until that bit of time where they were separated when she suddenly acts completely blasted. "Why didn't she tell people right away?" - Aside from shock, she seems to have been drugged.

And, yep, loving mother of 2, college student, obviously working hard to get herself and her kids a better life. Keeping up with a job and college is hard enough without kids!

And we've yet to see a link here that identifies her as a prostitute - I believe the PTB have put that accusation as something that needs proof before you can call her that.

Wudge
04-17-2006, 07:01 PM
She seems pretty consistent to me. Now this according to the paper - Charlotte Observer - she's an adultress, she's a liar, she's a thief, she's a stripper and prostitute - last known employer being the Allure Escort Agency - she's a convicted felon. Even the Navy didn't want her - general discharge not honourable. She even struggles with numbers - one penis, two penis, three penis - it's not that hard. Opps almost forgot - she's a loving and caring mother of two. Just bringing up the point that there may be a question of credibility here. Some people are more credulous than others.


Obviously, her credibility would be an issue; though, if a Durham trial is forthcoming, a favorable jury composite might well set any such issue aside.

kcnz
04-17-2006, 08:00 PM
And we've yet to see a link here that identifies her as a prostitute - I believe the PTB have put that accusation as something that needs proof before you can call her that.
She works or worked for the Allure Escort Agency. 1+1=2. Tha'ts pretty close to be definite for me. Of course some people have trouble with numbers. I see our college student came up with 1+1+1=2.

Summerskye1
04-17-2006, 08:12 PM
She works or worked for the Allure Escort Agency. 1+1=2. Tha'ts pretty close to be definite for me. Of course some people have trouble with numbers. I see our college student came up with 1+1+1=2.
What are you talking about? Can you please link to or quote anything that says she has retracted her statement that she was raped by three men?

Oh, I see...You seem to be assuming that her failure to positively ID one of the three alleged assailants means that the third guy was imaginary. Your conclusion is not logical. In fact, if she was seeking to falsely frame all three guys, why would she positively ID two men and say she wasn't 100% sure about the third? If she could lie about 1 & 2, surely she'd have no qualms about lying on #3, right?

Details
04-17-2006, 08:24 PM
She works or worked for the Allure Escort Agency. 1+1=2. Tha'ts pretty close to be definite for me. Of course some people have trouble with numbers. I see our college student came up with 1+1+1=2.We've been over this before - working for an escort agency does not equal that you are a prostitute, and it's not acceptable to bash the victim without proof - ask Jeana DP.

Our college student came up with 100% id on two guys, but only 90% on the other, so he wasn't indicted - he got lucky - or might be part of the cases held over to the next grand jury.

i.b.nora
04-17-2006, 08:30 PM
Now this according to the paper - Charlotte Observer - she's an adultress, she's a liar, she's a thief, she's a stripper and prostitute - last known employer being the Allure Escort Agency - she's a convicted felon. Even the Navy didn't want her - general discharge not honourable.

Please provide a link to the Charlotte Observer article saying all of the above.

The most recent article says:

"The woman could not be reached for comment. She served in the Navy and, according to her father, is studying to be a criminal lawyer. In 2002, she pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges stemming from an incident in which authorities said she stole a taxi cab, drove while impaired and led police on a lengthy car chase. She was required to spend three weekends in jail and was placed on probation for two years."

Two players indicted (http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/14362916.htm)

Wudge
04-17-2006, 08:50 PM
We've been over this before - working for an escort agency does not equal that you are a prostitute, and it's not acceptable to bash the victim without proof - ask Jeana DP.

Our college student came up with 100% id on two guys, but only 90% on the other, so he wasn't indicted - he got lucky - or might be part of the cases held over to the next grand jury.

She is an alleged victim, for no DNA was found after her alleged "gang" rape.

Masterj
04-17-2006, 09:09 PM
According to the paper when they hired "the victim" no colour was specified. The dancer unfortunately was reputed to be overweight - and this may have been a factor in her less than raptuous reception. So if there was a rape - they raped the fat one. As for the article re: white men's lust for black women - I'm only the messenger. The article I believed reflected the views of young African-American women. No one seems to have argued against it. Where is inductive logic when you need it most?What exactly is your point with this statement? Surely you are not insinuating that if these men are rapists they would have selected the thinner one to rape? Are you kidding me? Regardless of whether or not you believe this woman, overweight woman do get raped.

I really don't understand why you can't discuss her credibility without speaking about her in such a derogatory manner. :banghead:

Summerskye1
04-17-2006, 09:12 PM
She is an alleged victim, for no DNA was found after her alleged "gang" rape.
The presence or absence of DNA is not relevant, IMO, to whether folks here should or would call her a "victim" or an "alleged victim." Do you mean to tell me that if a DNA match had been made, everybody would unanimously agree that three Duke lacrosse players raped her? I personally doubt it. I'm pretty sure that some of the folks here would have simply adjusted their arguments slightly and would now be saying that it was consensual sex that the Duke players paid her for. Or they would have claimed that she lured the men into having sex with her so that she could make money off of them some other way. IMHO.

MagicRose99
04-17-2006, 09:22 PM
IMO This thread has degenerated into a farce. It has turned into "bash the victim". Certain individuals post "statements of facts" then, when asked to provide a link to back their claim, neglect to do so but continue making false accusations and stating outright lies. When someone tries to inject a dose of reality they are attacked...

I, for one, will no longer even read this thread... It isn't worth it because it no longer covers the story, it's bashing the victim.

concernedperson
04-17-2006, 09:34 PM
This thread hurts my feelings. Send them all to Ocilla, Georgia and they would be in good company. I hope that if I am ever raped and beaten that someone would at least give me a consideration. But, maybe not. Jeana, please just lock this as the inhumanity is not becoming.

Details
04-17-2006, 09:39 PM
This thread hurts my feelings. Send them all to Ocilla, Georgia and they would be in good company. I hope that if I am ever raped and beaten that someone would at least give me a consideration. But, maybe not. Jeana, please just lock this as the inhumanity is not becoming.I have to agree with you on everything - except about locking the thread - I know, we've had a continual stream of victim bashers coming on and making assumptions about the victim, based on her job - but there still is value to this thread, to keep up with the latest in this case, to see if someone can still get justice, even with the class and other barriers in the way.

It's a thread that takes a lot of moderation - but I hope it can be kept up a little longer, with some warnings or whatever is appropriate.

Wudge
04-17-2006, 09:57 PM
The presence or absence of DNA is not relevant, IMO, to whether folks here should or would call her a "victim" or an "alleged victim." Do you mean to tell me that if a DNA match had been made, everybody would unanimously agree that three Duke lacrosse players raped her? I personally doubt it. I'm pretty sure that some of the folks here would have simply adjusted their arguments slightly and would now be saying that it was consensual sex that the Duke players paid her for. Or they would have claimed that she lured the men into having sex with her so that she could make money off of them some other way. IMHO.

No DNA was found. No evidence was found indicating a condom was used either.

We have alleged crimes; i.e., a gang rape, kidnapping, etc.. In turn, we have an alleged victim.

In my mind, given all that we know at the present time, it is just as likely, if not moreso, that those indicted are the victims.

Jeana (DP)
04-21-2006, 08:57 PM
She seems pretty consistent to me. Now this according to the paper - Charlotte Observer - she's an adultress, she's a liar, she's a thief, she's a stripper and prostitute - last known employer being the Allure Escort Agency - she's a convicted felon. Even the Navy didn't want her - general discharge not honourable. She even struggles with numbers - one penis, two penis, three penis - it's not that hard. Opps almost forgot - she's a loving and caring mother of two. Just bringing up the point that there may be a question of credibility here. Some people are more credulous than others.


We don't know that she is now or ever was a prostitute, so until information comes out that specifically states that she was, please don't call her one, ok? Thanks for understanding.