Rape case bruises Durham and Duke
My column today:
Back in February, a delegation from Durham visited the News & Record's editorial board. Mayor Bill Bell and leaders from the Chamber of Commerce, Convention & Visitors Bureau and other organizations were on the road to talk up the city's image across the state.
One thing they didn't want to talk about, however, was the story that, for the past 11 months, had done more to shape public perception of Durham than anything else.
It was a story not even mentioned in a brochure produced by city government titled, "Durham Year in Review 2006."
Anyone else might think that Durham's year in review for 2006 would acknowledge the infamous Duke lacrosse rape case, but the subject was just too sore.
It still is, which is why the Durham City Council recently called off an independent investigation of its police department's role.
Yet, the city, its political leaders, its media, its voters and Duke University can't wish away their part in creating and prolonging a disgraceful travesty. ...
Casual observers of the sensational saga may see it as the work of a "rogue prosecutor," Mike Nifong. So it was. But Nifong could not, and probably would not, have pressed his persecution of Dave Evans, Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty on fraudulent rape charges without the cooperation of Durham police and the vociferous encouragement of the Durham political establishment, the media and agenda-driven Duke faculty members unchecked by university administrators.
Authors Stuart Taylor Jr. and KC Johnson forcefully present those conclusions in a book published last week, "Until Proven Innocent/Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case." It's a devastating indictment of the culture, on campus and off, that supported Nifong during his handling of the case and enabled his election last November, even when fair-minded people recognized his wrongful prosecution.
There's no need to repeat the familiar violations of legal procedures and professional ethics that led to Nifong's disbarment and brief jail sentence for contempt of court.
More revealing to readers will be the authors' accounting of what the Durham council doesn't want the public to know about police officers' complicity. It explains why the city is apparently so willing to negotiate with attorneys for Evans, Seligmann and Finnerty who are threatening a multimillion-dollar lawsuit.
Taylor and Johnson detail Nifong's successful effort to win political backing among Durham's black leaders, a motivating factor for the DA to charge after indictments even without credible evidence to justify the allegations.
Even more alarming, as documented by the authors, was the behavior of radical Duke faculty members, mostly drawn from race, gender and class studies programs, for whom accusations that privileged white, male athletes raped a poor black woman confirmed preconceived notions about power, exploitation and injustice. Instead of sifting facts from lies or allowing due process, they joined the chorus of condemnation and hatred, from which Nifong drew moral validation. Duke President Richard Brodhead and his lieutenants weren't much better, in Taylor and Johnson's view.
There are good guys in their book, as well: Duke Law Professor James Coleman, an African American and expert in legal ethics and innocence issues, who spoke out early for truth; the N.C. State Bar, which effectively knocked Nifong off the case; N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper, who ultimately declared the defendants innocent and the charges a fabrication; the defense attorneys, whose extraordinary efforts uncovered critical evidence Nifong tried to hide; and Evans, Seligmann, Finnerty, their coaches, teammates and families, who endured a terrible ordeal with perseverance and dignity.
"Until Proven Innocent" should be on reading lists at Duke and throughout Durham, but it may be the last thing people there want to talk about.
Comments (24)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Doug, with regards to your list of "good guys" in this mess, I ask you, in the glare of national media scrutiny, WHAT CHOICE did the State Bar and NC Atrorney General have but to (1) cut down Nifong and (2) declare the Duke three innocent?
I submit that what might have really made them "good guys" is if they had done it BEFORE the glare of the cameras exposed every angle of a very bad case.
Posted on September 12, 2007 8:04 AM
Cooper did not have to declare the three defendants innocent. He could have stopped at saying there was insufficient evidence of guilty to sustain the charges. By going a step further, he makes himself something vulnerable in a future Democratic primary.
The State Bar could have waited until after the case was resolved before acting on Nifong's misdeeds but chose to move expeditiously.
However, Taylor and Johnson may agree with you that the Bar and the AG really didn't have much choice, although they didn't explicitly say that in the book.
Posted on September 12, 2007 8:29 AM
Take it easy, Doug. You're being too hard on these people. They may in time come to appreciate that they can't, like you say, "wish away their role in creating and prolonging a disgraceful travesty". We do understand, like you say, "the subject is a little too sore" to talk about. Like you say, the situation could not have occured without the "vociferous encouragement of the political establishment, the MEDIA and agenda-driven people.
Anytime you're ready to acknowlege and apologize for YOUR role in the High Point "Choice Plan"...
Anytime you're ready to acknowlege and apologize for HPE editorials like: "let's put some low income housing up in N. High Point and watch how those people stop shouting neighborhood schools" and other assorted polemics etc. we'll be all ears. After all, you seem to be expecting other people to acknowledge and apologize. It would be a nice gesture and you would be practicing what you are preaching. A good thing, no?
Posted on September 12, 2007 9:43 AM
Take it easy, Doug. You're being too hard on these people. They may in time come to appreciate that they can't, like you say, "wish away their role in creating and prolonging a disgraceful travesty". We do understand, like you say, "the subject is a little too sore" to talk about. Like you say, the situation could not have occured without the "vociferous encouragement of the political establishment, the MEDIA and agenda-driven people.
Anytime you're ready to acknowlege and apologize for YOUR role in the High Point "Choice Plan"...
Anytime you're ready to acknowlege and apologize for HPE editorials like: "let's put some low income housing up in N. High Point and watch how those people stop shouting neighborhood schools" and other assorted polemics etc. we'll be all ears. After all, you seem to be expecting other people to acknowledge and apologize. It would be a nice gesture and you would be practicing what you are preaching. A good thing, no?
Posted on September 12, 2007 9:44 AM
Savage, I suppose you were angry about yesterday's commemorations. Imagine people still being more upset about the 9/11 attacks than about the Choice Plan.
Posted on September 12, 2007 9:58 AM
Good dodge, Doug. You still got it, kid.
You should think about offering your services to the Durham C.of C. Let me know if you need a letter of recc.
Posted on September 12, 2007 10:08 AM
"Until Proven Innocent" should be on reading lists at Duke and throughout Durham, but it may be the last thing people there want to talk about.* Doug
For gosh sakes Doug! Why in the world did you leave Dr Bill Anderson out of the Duke story? He lead the fight with KC and others....By the way, the Bar and the AG were simply piling on after a sure win.
Past articles by William L. Anderson on LewRockwell.com
Capture and Corruption
William L. Anderson on Nifong's cronies and cabal.
Socialists, Duke, and Deceit
William L. Anderson on prevaricating PC anti-propertyites.
Duke's Bourbon Intellectuals
They learn nothing, and they forget nothing.
Free Michael Vick
It's the feds who are cruel and barbaric, says William L. Anderson.
Socialist Bridges
William L. Anderson on why they fall down.
Nifonged in Narragansett
William L. Anderson on the continuing prosecutorial madness.
Cowards and Bullies
William L. Anderson on officials and faculty at Duke, and an important new book.
Trouble at the Prosecutorial Hilton
William L. Anderson on the two Americas.
Dear Nifong
William L. Anderson's final open letter to the ex-DA.
An Open Letter to the Duke Lacrosse Families
William L. Anderson on the trial of Nifong.
In Praise of Ryan McFadyen
William L. Anderson on a young man vs. "criminal justice."
Duke Lacrosse
Vindicated off the field, not on it.
Celebrating the Rule of Force
William L. Anderson on Memorial Day.
The Whitewash Continues
William L. Anderson on Duke and Durham.
Executive Orders vs. Law
William L. Anderson on the budding dictatorship.
More Crimes By the NY Times
William L. Anderson on the lying newspaper of record.
The Duke Crimes
William L. Anderson writes the victims: Collin, David, and Reade.
Duke: the End
And the beginning.
What To Say When You Drop the Charges
William L. Anderson writes the NC attorney general.
Try Telling the Truth
William L. Anderson advises the NC attorney general.
The Lies of the State
And Michael B. Nifong.
Death of a Hero
William L. Anderson on Kirk Osborne and the Duke non-rape.
Hey, Roy
William L. Anderson writes an open letter to the NC attorney general.
The Faculty Mafiosi
William L. Anderson on the Duke hoax and the death of academia.
The Duke Hoax at One Year
William L. Anderson on what we've learned.
An Evening To Remember
William L. Anderson on watching Duke lacrosse in action.
The Sociopathic State
William L. Anderson on Michael B. Nifong.
The Criminal Cover-Up Continues
William L. Anderson on Duke and Durham.
The NAACP and the Nature of Evidence
William L. Anderson on the Darryl Hunt case.
The Breeding Ground of Tyranny
William L. Anderson on "emergencies."
Goebbels Justice
William L. Anderson on the Edenton Seven.
The Cost of the Lie
William L. Anderson on Duke, the courts, and official hoaxes.
The Duke Meltdown
William J. Anderson on racial diversity and elite educational institutions.
Michael Nifong's Worm Factory
William L. Anderson on yet another crime by the prosecution.
Is Duke Liable?
William L. Anderson on the university's persecution of its students.
The Anatomy of a Hoax
William L. Anderson on the Duke charade.
Twana Brawley Goes to Duke
William L. Anderson on what he learned in 2006 from the famous non-rape case.
Explain Yourself, Nifong
An open letter to the Duke prosecutor, from William L. Anderson.
Duke and the Politics of Rape
William L. Anderson on the Liefong railroad.
Duke: the Lies Continue
William L. Anderson on Liefong.
An Open Letter to the Innocence Project
Why are you ignoring the railroaded Duke boys?
The Rape of Justice
William L. Anderson on Durham, Duke, and dishonor.
Durham and Scottsboro
Bill Anderson on the ominous parallels.
What If the Duke 3 Had Been Black?
William L. Anderson on race, athletes, and rape.
Roosevelt the Thief
William L. Anderson on the fascist New Deal and the seizure of our gold.
Blogging Against Injustice
William L. Anderson on the web opposition to prosecutorial injustice in the Duke case.
The Duke Non-Rape Case
William L. Anderson on post-modern prosecution.
The Trouble With Thanksgiving
William L. Anderson on a government celebration.
Courts of the State
And the state of justice. William L. Anderson on the Duke hoax.
Why the Duke Hoax Continues
William L. Anderson on Durham and the politics of entitlement.
Why the Duke Hoax Continues
William L. Anderson on the faculty.
Where Libertarians Go Wrong
Some libertarians, anyway.
The NAACP and Jim Crow Justice
William L. Anderson on the Duke "rape."
Duke and Deceit
And the university president who helped railroad the innocent.
The Death of Academe
William L. Anderson on Duke, "rape," and the corruption of the universities.
Life on the Reservation
Where the Great White Father in Washington would like us all.
Duking Justice
William L. Anderson on a criminal prosecution.
Lying Prosecutors, Professors, and Reporters
William L. Anderson on Duke's "Reichstag fire."
Nifonging the Standards of Justice
William L. Anderson on the DA and the NY Times vs. the truth.
Jon Benet and Duke
William L. Anderson on Boulder, Durham, and sham justice.
The Lying NY Times
William L. Anderson on the Newspaper of Record and the Duke "rape" case.
Blogs vs. the Mainstream Media
We're winning, says William L. Anderson, as the Duke non-rape case shows.
The Duke Rape Scandal
And a media shill for the prosecution.
Criminal Prosecution
William L. Anderson on how Michael Nifong intends to frame the Duke defendants.
Tawana Brawley II
William L. Anderson on the Duke scandal.
Why the Duke Case Matters
It shines a spotlight on an American sickness, says William L. Anderson.
The Rotten 'Progressive Era'
William L. Anderson on the founding of the current regime.
The Duke Lacrosse Case
William L. Anderson on a "meaning" in search of a scandal.
The Duke 'Rape' Scandal
William L. Anderson on the evil of government prosecutors.
Lynching the Lacrosse Team
William L. Anderson on Duke, DNA, and the law.
Posted on September 12, 2007 11:27 AM
Doug:
This almost sounds like a recommendation for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission approach to Duke's and Durham's problems.
It would be helpful if the community there (and elsewhere) reflected on its role in trying to railroad the lacrosse players into the criminal justice system. There is definitely a learning opportunity here. A horrible mistake was made, and we need to learn how not to make it again.
While I agree with the general point of the column, it would have been more powerful if it also described how we all should change our thinking rather than just calling on the Durham community to reflect on "their" mistakes (and more powerful yet if it described a personal change in thinking). To borrow your words, "casual observers of the sensational saga may see it as the work of a 'rogue' community." Is Durham so different from Greensboro or other communities? Are its media less fair-minded? Are liberals more likely to engage in a rush to judgment?
Posted on September 12, 2007 12:38 PM
I think something like this could have happened in Greensboro, but only if the DA and police department were similarly dishonest.
Conservatives probably would rush to judgment if the circumstances presented them an opportunity to confirm their worldview, just as the liberal faculty members at Duke exploited what they thought they knew about the lacrosse players. The difference is that at Duke, according to the Taylor/Johnson account, the radical leftist faculty members are so powerful that very few others on campus, even top administrators, dare to challenge them.
Posted on September 12, 2007 12:47 PM
the radical leftist faculty members are so powerful that very few others on campus, even top administrators, dare to challenge them.*Doug
Not anymore! They are hiding from the very rich and powerful and well political connected Duke conservative grads. They have got the message along with President Broadhead. Do it again and you will have Coach K as President with the 88 running around Cameron Stadium 24/7 with protest signs saying Jesus loves Duke.
Posted on September 12, 2007 6:18 PM
Ah....Doug. Oh, Dooooug-- The north High Pointers are still waiting...
Just wondering how you expect those Durham / Duke folks to do a mea culpa when you won't do one? Why even write about it.
In this country, usually on the advice of their attorney's, nobody ever admits they were wrong or a posterior alimentary opening. It's against the culture and also can result in considerable compensatory and punitive damages. We understand. Other cultures they do stuff like seppuku-you know-rip out one's innards with a ceremonial dagger or at least resign. Not here.
Doug, you could start a new cultural trend. Right here. Right now. Surprise us.
Posted on September 13, 2007 11:24 AM
If I come to that conclusion, I'll write a separate post so as not to confuse distinct issues.
Posted on September 13, 2007 11:30 AM
You're in denial about the issues being intertwined. You have been. We don't expect that to change. The similarities and dynamics are obviously very much the same, such that to list them again would tax beyond the pale-even my pale.
We are giving you a chance for a spirititual re-birth and you are declining.
Free yourself, Doug. Let it light from your chest like a spring Robin. You'll see your vision become clearer, your focus sharper, your writing will spring forth like water from a fountain.
It's not too late.
To whip It. Whip it good!
Posted on September 13, 2007 3:05 PM
Savage,
I think I've advised you before: take it to a bigger forum. If, as you say, the injustices of busing your child to an inner-city high school a few miles away indeed compare to the Duke rape case, the national media and those high-powered lawyers now working for the former Duke defendants will come knocking on your door.
Posted on September 13, 2007 3:16 PM
Doug, why not invite your readers to go read your now famous "LOw Income Housing For Skeet Club" Feb 2004 HPE editorial, or better yet put it on this blog and take a vote if people see the same "let's demonize and screw the putatively priviledged white guy dynamic" was not present. Let the readers decide. I DARE YOU.
On the other hand. please don't do this. Let's let it die. It's an issue that has passed into the nether-world anyway with the recent Supreme court ruling etc.
Before the coffin lid closes, we were hoping you would redeem yourself.
Creak....creak....
Posted on September 13, 2007 3:36 PM
I did that on this blog, probably a couple of years ago. I still believe HP should have spread low-income public housing around rather than concentrate it in the inner city. North HP would be perfect, especially because of the proximity to the airport area and Piedmont Centre job engines. Why do you object to people being able to find affordable housing closer to good employment opportunities?
Posted on September 13, 2007 3:43 PM
That was never the issue or the point of your editorial. It was just your way of making the implication that busing is good and we should be glad to do it. (even though it goes against the grain of your other conservative Repubican political beliefs which you were willing to waive, by the way, because you thought it would boost YOUR neighborhood school demographics.
Posted on September 13, 2007 4:28 PM
Creak.....Pffffttttttt....
And so we reach our silent, Johnsonian end.
Posted on September 14, 2007 9:53 AM
If only. But I'm sure you'll bring it up again, over and over. What do you want, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to validate your martyrdom?
Posted on September 14, 2007 10:01 AM
Doug, once you come across with the truth, then we can reconcile. Don't you see?
Posted on September 14, 2007 10:32 AM
If the Duke Case bruised Durham, then what did the Darryl Hunt Case do to Winston-Salem?
Hunt spent 20 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit. None on the lawyers from Hunt's Case were disbarred. Heck, they were given even better jobs.
So the Duke kids were embarassed for a year--the media has already moved on to a bigger story.
Posted on September 26, 2007 11:15 AM
Thanks for your comment.
Don't you wish the Hunt prosecution could have been halted before he was wrongfully convicted?
You seem to be saying that because Hunt was railroaded, it's OK that the Duke defendants were almost railroaded.
I don't care who the accused are. No DA should get away with prosecuting people for a crime that didn't occur. Nifong had no evidence and proceeded anyway. How does anyone excuse that?
Posted on September 26, 2007 12:02 PM
Doug,
What I'm saying is because a poor African American man was railroaded and sent to prison for 20 years and those who did it to him still have their bar association cards and work for the state of NC, I have a had time mustering sympathy for the Duke Lacrosse players.
If we're going to make changes in the legal system, let's not just do it because the defendants are rich and/or white.
Posted on September 26, 2007 3:50 PM
Sorry, I don't understand not having sympathy for anyone wrong prosecuted, whether it's Hunt or the Duke defendants.
But, bottom line, you don't have to be sympathetic to press for reforms, such as:
Allow more openness in the grand jury system, or go back to probable cause hearings;
Give judges the authority to intervene when prosecutors are obviously violating defendants' rights.
Posted on September 26, 2007 4:00 PM