All charges in Duke rape case dropped

I'm with you on baseless lawsuits...or huge money for small damage (the McDonalds coffee in the lap case comes screaming to mind here) but these boys were branded for life in this case...they will always be the ones in the Duke LaCrosse case...their lives were turned upside down for a year and they were the butt of public disdain. Two were forced to remove themselves from Duke University and the other, who graduated the day before the indictment, was denied a job that was offered to him on Wall Street.

If I'm on the jury I order the Brinks truck to back up for these guys. I see Durham getting sued, Duke getting sued, Mike Nifong getting sued, and the State of North Carolina getting sued they are all to some extent complicit in this case.

There are criminal charges posed against Nifong, but I can't for the life of me understand why this young lady hasn't been at least charged with filing a false police report.

Rev. Sharpton hasn't said anything recently about this case (I believe that he is busy ruining the career of a man who has raised over 100 million dollars for needy children), to my knowledge, but I think that he owes these boys an appology also.

 

Alleged assault, alleged assault.

 

You need not worry. Mr. Shabaz has done it for him. He appeared on The O'Reilly factor last night and called Michelle Malkin a whore on national television. One sweetheart of a guy.

 

Duke Rape Prosecutor Shares Evidence with Black Panthers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Jim Kouri
May 2, 2006

Malik Zulu Shabazz, an attorney with the New Black Panthers, told Fox News Channel Tuesday that the prosecutor in the Duke rape case shared information and evidence with the Panthers during a meeting.

In an interview with Fox News Channel's Brian Kilmeade and Juliet Huddy, Shabazz said that members of his group, who are protesting the treatment of the alleged victim of a rape by the Duke University lacrosse team, met with the prosecutor to review his evidence against the students.

Shabazz claims the evidence shows the white lacrosse players are guilty of sexually assaulting the victim, who's a black woman.

When Fox's Kilmeade told the Black Panther leader that the victim's father didn't want them in Durham, Shabazz said that the victim's father should keep his mouth shut.

During a rally near the Duke campus, members of the New Black Panthers lead protesters in chants and made several speeches. They are recognized by many as a racist, nationalist black group, with some being former Nation of Islam members, headed by Louis Farrakhan.

“What do we want? Justice! And when do we want it? Now!”

That was just one of the chants the New Black Panthers shouted. They arrived by police escort outside the Duke University gates, but they also had their own security, some wearing combat boots and others with knives on their hips.

While in the past, Panthers showed up at events armed with guns, there were no firearms observed in Durham.

“We're here today because a human life has been violated in the city of Durham, and we’re here seeking justice,” said Dr. Bruce Bridges, a member of the New Black Panthers party.

“Black power, black power!” chants echoed throughout the crowd as members explained their cause.

“We will defend our black women. [The] New Black Panther party and black men is not going to stand by, idly by, and let our black women be raped,” said Nigi Muhammed.

“You say we are playing the race card. No we're not playing the race card. You with all the cameras, your forefathers been playing race cards for the past 450 years.”

“I am here with these brothers because it appears Durham does not want to see the truth,” said Durham school board member Jackie Wagstaff.

The New Black Panthers are convinced members of the Duke lacrosse team raped the N.C. Central student and are demanding a conviction.

“We don't care whether our sister was stripping or not. We say that that was only a temporary condition of circumstance. But to us she is a righteous and divine woman by nature,” said party member Malik Zulu Shabazz.

Campus police turned the protestors away before they could go on campus.
Shabazz added that he believes Duke has played a role in allowing this scandal to happen:

“For the record, the history of Duke University is riddled in slavery, racist oppression and racism against black people.”

Moments later the protesters tried to walk onto Duke's campus, but campus police stopped them.

“Are you telling me that the president of Duke University is denying the African-American community from coming on this campus?” one protestor asked.

Campus police said the president would not allow the protest to take place on campus because this week is exam week.

When the marchers were turned away from Duke’s gates, they decided to take things into their hands and walk down the streets of Durham straight to the lacrosse house.

The New Black Panthers want the city to turn the lacrosse house into a rape crisis center, and said they want to make sure the trial remains in Durham and not allow a change in venue for the court proceedings.

The New Black Panthers offered the woman accusing the lacrosse players protection, but the family turned down the offer and said they did not ask the Panthers to come to Durham.

 

Not to pull off topic, but I hate it when people quote this case. Most people (not saying you, but maybe you too) know almost nothing about the actual case and think a lady simply got $1mm just for spilling coffee on herself because that's the "story" they have heard.

 

Very true monsieur Le Serpent. The rules of evidence are vastly different in a civil suit (preponderance of evidence) than in a criminal prosecution (reasonable doubt). One proceeds far beyond excessive heating of the private parts in a rape case. In the criminal case one must also prove a prima face case for the alleged perpetrator actually being at the scene of the alleged crime (disproved in the Duke case) as opposed to showing the residual beverage and/or vessel in which said beverage was conveyed. These are the least of the pertinent details of either case.

I am certain, nonetheless that messrs. Sharpton, Jackson, and Shabaz would need a translator for this discussion while you, Mon Ami, may be smiling with attendant audible expressions of mirth.

 

Trust that your eloquent diatribe of messrs. Sharpton, Jackson and Shabaz was not lost in translation.

 

I probably know more than most but not more than everyone.

It was $2.86 million when the $200,000 compensatory damage was reduced to $160,000 (the jury found that she was 20% responsible for the spill) then they awarded her $2.7 million in punative damages (the trial court dropped this amount down to $480,000 or three times compensatory damages.) so the total amount of the award was $640,000...McDonalds had the chance to get out and settle for 20 grand early in the case, they rolled the dice on the trial and lost big.

 

But the crux of the entire case was the ability of the plaintiff's attorneys to prove that McDonald's was knowingly serving coffee at a temperature that had hurt people many times before. McDonald's decided that serving extra hot coffee brought in more revenue than potential litigation would cost.

I'm sure you know this (based on your knowledge of the case), but most people don't. The case has really grown into more of a story based on pieces of fact than anything else, hence my disdain for its reference.

 

You are totally entitled to your disdain. McDonalds lowered the temperature of their coffee from (I believe) 180 to 160 F. Trust me you can still burn yourself pretty bad at 160 F (third degree burns at about 1 second of exposure). I think that the trial judge got it right by lowering the Puniative damages as he did...I mean the long and the short is that the lady spilled the coffee on herself...it wasn't pored into her lap. BTW McDonalds settled a case where the worker did pour coffee into the lap of a customer for less than what this verdict cost them.

Digressing, how about that Mike Nifong...bets on how long his law license gets suspended?

 

I'll say it gets yanked for life. This case is too high-profile for anything less.

 

I really don't think so. He has too much support in Durham. Support for the incompetent by the incompetent, or something to that effect. Nearly like the toxic substance in the air in Boulder, Colorado. We'll see.

 

If the case hadn't been splashed around the national spotlight I think he'd stand a better chance of keeping his license. It certainly doesn't help that the kids he went after come from affluent families with probable connections of their own. We'll see if the added pressure and attention have any impact, or if this whole case fades away quietly.

 

Do people really get them yanked for life?? It seems that everytime you hear someone going before the Bar review for very bad things they get a year or two suspension.

 

Five years for perjury for Der Schlichmeister. Methinks Nifong will not only be reelected next time but, back in the news at that time as a hero. Write that down.

 

in a power point pros and cons "screw-worthiness" presentation

http://www.thefatwhiteguy.com/index.php/2010/09/groupie-karen-f-owen-does-power-point-on-duke-athletes-sexual-prowess/

 

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:www.linkedin.com/pub/karen-owen/15/a13/821

 

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39552862/ns/today-today_people?Gt1=43001

 

Let me know when Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson apologize for all the things they said while this was going on (sic).

 

Dont hold your breath.

Hell will issue parkas before either of them ever admit their mistakes.