Updated - today's items:
Rony Camille & Dr. Bruce dePyssler, NCCU.edu/The Echo Online:
Second thoughts on the Solomon Burnette op-ed -- With the luxury of time, time that we didn’t have on the night of production, we have concluded that our decision to run the April 18 op-ed by Solomon Burnette, “Death to all rapists,” was a mistake. We regret our decision to run the column, given its call for violence.
Burnette has a right to his opinion. He has a right to disagree with the decision to drop the lacrosse rape allegations. He has a right to be suspicious of our nation’s justice system. He has a right to interpret everything through the lens of white racism. He has a right to hold all these opinions -- even if we disagree with them. And he has a right to express his opinions in the student newspaper.
The Campus Echo respects every student’s right to free speech, but the Campus Echo is no place for a call to violence. We took his call for violence to be purely rhetorical. Even so, if we were to have the choice to reconsider, we would not run the piece.
In an April 29 interview with Burnette, the editor-in-chief was unable to get Burnette to clarify whether he was actually calling for violence.
“People can take it how they want,” Burnette said...
Eric Ferreri, News & Observer:
College newspaper editor regrets column -- The editor-in-chief of The Campus Echo - N.C. Central University's student newspaper — has posted a column to the paper's Web site expressing regret for publishing a column in a recent issue that appeared to promote violence.
Editor-in-Chief Rony Camille posted the note to readers today saying he regrets publishing a column by student Solomon Burnette bearing the headline "Death to all Rapists."
The Echo, a bi-weekly publication, is done publishing for the academic year...
Ray Gronberg, Herald-Sun: Campus newspaper's editor, adviser regret column -- Both the editor and the adviser of N.C. Central University's student newspaper regret allowing publication of a column about the Duke lacrosse case that appeared to advocate violence.
Much untold in Duke rape case -- CATHY YOUNG'S criticism of me for my public comments on the Duke case was notable for its lack of sophistication, misinformation, and self-righteous tone ("A rush to injustice in the Duke 'rape' case," Op-ed, April 16).
I gave the prosecution's side on many television news programs, as I am often asked to do in high-profile criminal cases. Given that the defense was revealing only selective information to the media and that the prosecution was forbidden to respond with a full disclosure of the truth, we don't have any idea what the real evidence is in the case. I was told by a reporter that the defense refused to release more than 1,000 pages of evidence. Could there be witness statements from the defendants' friends -- statements saying that a rape occurred just as the victim described? Until those documents are released, the public can and should speculate about what might be in there.
That Cathy Young is comfortable forming her opinion without access to all the evidence is unfortunate, though she is not alone. The mainstream media have simply accepted claims from the attorney general in North Carolina that there was no rape. What happened to the idea that the press is the guardian of the public's right to know? Cathy Young, as an opinion writer with an obvious agenda, can be forgiven . But the mainstream press should be ashamed of itself.The writer is an adjunct professor at the New England School of Law.
KC Johnson: A Question for Wendy Murphy -- a question for Wendy Murphy: why is Crystal Mangum keeping the only "secret" material in the case away from the public? Given Ms. Murphy's desire for openness, will she now call for Mangum to consent to the unsealing and publication of her heretofore secret medical file? . . .
KC Johnson: The Astonishing Wendy Murphy -- The astonishing Wendy Murphy continues her campaign of distortion with a letter in today’s Boston Globe. Proclaims she, “We don’t have any idea what the real evidence is in the case.” We don’t? So, when in doubt, make things up: “I was told by a reporter that the defense refused to release more than 1,000 pages of evidence.” What reporter? Murphy doesn’t say. What “1,000 pages of evidence”? Again, Murphy doesn’t say. Is she now accusing the defense of withholding evidence from the attorney general? Again, Murphy doesn’t say...
LS forum: Letter from Wendy Murphy
LS forum: Dealing with Wendy Murphy, boycott advertisers?
TalkLeft forum: Wendy Murphy's bid for a lawsuit...
TalkLeft: Cash Michaels' e-mail to Bill Anderson -- Dear Prof. Anderson:
I hope you and your family are doing fine since the last time we communicated.
I'm sending this missive to you not only in response to your most recent email to me, but for you, if you would be so kind, to post at Liestoppers, so that I may "stop" a few lies in their tracks. ..
I just finished the thread regarding the Boston WTKK-FM Sunday appearance of attorney Wendy Murphy and myself.
Once again the posters at LS incorrectly take a piece of erroneous information about yours truly, and blow it up to the point where once the truth is revealed, it doesn't matter, because the lie overshadows everything.
For the record, while attorney Murphy and I were courteous to each other, we disagreed on 99.9 percent of the discussion.
LS forum: Wendy and Cash, Together., On Boston Radio
LS forum: Houston Baker, Need some Help
LS forum: Blog and Media Roundup, Tuesday 05/01/07
Talking to Regulars & Commenters -- Another commenter picked me up for saying the N&O had not explained its thirteen month long cover-up of the exculpatory statements Crystal Mangum made during the Mar. 24, 2006 anonymous interview.
Folks, I know Editor Sill and others at the N&O have said it was “a story on deadline;” that the N&O withheld “only details;” and that the N&O was “handicapped during the first week” by what the N&O says was the failure of the players and parents to cooperate with it.
Those are not explanations; they’re deceptive excuses.
You don’t explain a thirteen month cover-up of critically important and exculpatory news the public and other media should have had with “a story on deadline.”
If “on deadline” was the explanation for the exculpatory news not being in the March 25, 2006 story, there was nothing stopping the N&O from reporting it the next day, was there?
The only value I find in the N&O “on deadline” excuse is that it reveals the N&O’s contempt for its readers’ intelligence...
When A Lineup is Not A Lineup and A Suspect is Not A Suspect -- Apparently determined to continue defending the universally condemned identification procedure that allowed three innocent men to be railroaded by Durham County’s rogue district attorney, Durham City Manager Patrick Baker has creatively expanded his Nifong-esque non-lineup lineup argument. Baker's latest revisionist spin now claims that the corrupt identification procedure directed by Mike Nifong and conducted by Baker’s police department was appropriate because it included imaginary non-suspects as well as suspects...
Despite Baker’s creative assertion, the non-testimonial identification order [NTO] by which the photographs were obtained specifically for use in "photographic lineups to identify suspects" states clearly to each of the forty-six subjects of the photo array that there were grounds "to suspect that you committed" the imaginary assault...
KC Johnson (Oct. 8, 2006)
The Effects of Corrupted Procedures -- Flawed procedures beget flawed results, and massively flawed procedures beget massively flawed results. That’s the conclusion from what is the single most important article about the case to appear, under Joseph Neff’s byline in this morning’s N&O. Neff’s work painstakingly explains why procedure matters, highlighting what I consider the single most stunning aspect of this case—that the district attorney of Durham County ordered the Durham Police Department to violate its own procedures in multiple ways for an April 4 lineup...
comment: One classic KC Johnson quote: "Flawed procedures beget flawed results, and massively flawed procedures beget massively flawed results."
Police, DA differ on deals -- The top judge in Durham County chided an assistant prosecutor Monday for trying to renege on an agreement between police and a man who provided information that helped investigators crack a homicide case.
Judge Orlando Hudson, senior resident Superior Court judge, told Assistant District Attorney Tracey Cline at a hearing that she could not proceed with a first-degree murder charge against Lemuel "Zeke" Sherman...
Hudson suggested that the problem before him Monday could be a symptom of a broader divide between the District Attorney's Office and police.
He made a passing mention of the Duke lacrosse case as he told Cline not to proceed with charges against Sherman other than the accessory after the fact to murder.
In the wake of state Attorney General Roy Cooper's recent dismissal of the lacrosse case charges and his description of District Attorney Mike Nifong as a rogue prosecutor, city officials have asked for an accounting from Durham police."If there's a problem with police making promises that the District Attorney's Office doesn't want to deal with," Hudson said, "maybe that's a problem that y'all can sit down and talk about."
WHAT DOES A SOCIAL DISASTER SOUND LIKE? --
The following petition was endorsed by over 1,000 Duke Students along with recent graduates . . .
WE, THE STUDENTS OF DUKE UNIVERSITY
DEMAND AN APOLOGY FROM THE GROUP OF 88
WE CALL UPON PRESIDENT BRODHEAD TO
FINALLY STAND UP FOR HIS STUDENTS
LieStoppers forum: Chronicle Ad Endorsed by 1,000 Duke Students, Ad Criticizes "Group of 88"
LieStoppers blog: What Does A Social Disaster Sound Like?
Duke Chronicle comments: Profs Stand behind "Social Disaster" ad
TalkLeft: l000 Angry Voices
Duke Basketball Report:
Some Faculty Responses To Lax Developments -- No one should ask any of these people to apologize for their beliefs. But in this case, the statement was part of a rush to judgment (when you speak of “what happened to this young woman” with absolutely no evidence other than hearsay, and tell students and other protestors “[t]hank you for not waiting” … that in our opinion contributed directly to things like the “Castrate” placard, among other excesses) that led to some pretty awful stuff for the lacrosse players, in particular of course the three who were charged. There were some comments in recent days about the level of ostracization on campus. It’s hard to imagine what those guys went through, with people pointing fingers, calling them rapists, or even getting death threats.
As we said, people are entitled to their beliefs. But in this case, the public position of the signees, rather than alleviating some of the problems they sought to address, actually mirrored many of them instead, and had the ironic effect of creating a hostile environment for the lacrosse players.
In retrospect, we’re sure many of the faculty members were chagrined to learn the true facts of the case. The original statement was taken down long ago, which tends to support the idea that it had become an embarrassment...What happened here was a rape of the truth, and anyone who is interested in truth, who wishes for justice, and who got this case wrong, should just say so. There was a real human cost to this exercise in 21st century Puritanism, but unlike the witch trials in Salem, it’s not too late to apologize to the injured, or, failing that, to at least acknowledge their humanity and the suffering that they and their families have been put through. It’s just simple human decency.
The Group: Divided, Defiant, Delusional -- Yesterday’s Chronicle featured a statement endorsed by more than 1,000 Duke students asking, “What Does a Social Disaster Sound Like?” To the students, it sounded like a group of 88 professors who, “in a time of intense emotions and enormous stakes, when our community dearly needed a call for calm, for patience, for rational and careful thinking . . . instead took a course of action which escalated tensions, spurred divisions along lines of race and class, and brought our community into greater turmoil.” The Duke students termed themselves “ashamed by the apparent decision of these faculty members to exploit a tragic situation to further their own political and social agendas.”
Accordingly, the students demanded either an apology from the Group of 88 or President Brodhead to “come forward and defend his students against the assaults launched by his own faculty.” . . .
Meanwhile, William Chafe identified the true victims of this case—the Group of 88. And he lashed out at the real villains—people who produce blogs.In an e-mail to the Chronicle, the former Dean of Faculty wildly contended, “I am appalled at the way that bloggers who have targeted the ‘Group of 88’ have put words in our mouths, denied our individuality and [used] racist and violent language to attack us—including sending us e-mails and making phone calls wishing our deaths and calling us ‘Jew b-’ and ‘n-b-’.” [emphasis added]I contacted every blogger who has done more than one post about the Group and its activities (except for Johnsville News, which has no e-mail contact info). I asked each whether he or she had phoned or e-mailed Chafe or any other Group member; and if so, in what context. The responses: Bill Anderson, Michael Gustafson, and La Shawn Barber, as well as the bloggers from Liestoppers, Lead and Gold, Betsy’s Page, Crystal Mess, and John in Carolina all noted that they had never called or e-mailed Chafe. . .
Craig Henry, Lead & Gold blog: The gang that couldn't think straight
comment: For the record, The Johnsville News has never called or e-mailed Prof. Chafe. The Johnsville News has never contacted any member of the "Group of 88." So which "bloggers" are allegedly using "racist and violent language to attack" Prof. Chafe and the Group of 88?
Here is an an example of wingnuts from the left going after someone who pointed out Al Gore might be a big hypocrite --
Robert Bluey, TownHall.com: The Left-Wing Echo Chamber -- Death threats. Harassing phone calls. Threatening e-mails. Such was a day in the life of Drew Johnson a few weeks ago.
His crime? Johnson is president of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, a free-market think tank that broke one of the juiciest stories of 2007. A day after the Academy Awards, on Feb. 26, Johnson’s organization reported details of Al Gore’s enormous utility bill. The former vice president had consumed nearly 221,000 kilowatt hours of electricity in a single year -- more than 20 times the national average.
"Being slightly paranoid is like being slightly pregnant - it tends to get worse."
-- Molly Ivins
"A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on." -- William S. Burroughs
NYT Ignores Own Errors in Duke 'Rape' Hoax Coverage -- New York Times reporter Duff Wilson, author of the notorious front-page story from August 25, 2006 riding to the defense of rogue prosecutor Michael Nifong's rape case hoax at Duke University, picks gingerly through the case's wreckage in Saturday's "'Credibility Issues' Undid Duke Case, Report Says," while avoiding his own contribution to it.Blogger, law professor and case expert KC Johnson has noted the Times has never corrected falsehoods in the timeline in Wilson's August 25 story. Wilson's Saturday piece hews closer to the truth, but without acknowledging his original errors. . .
Wrong lessons from the Duke case -- Do women lie all the time about being raped? ...
But instead of putting the blame where it belongs -- on Nifong and the justice system's almost pathological reluctance to admit when it's wrong -- many commentators are seizing on the Duke case to allege that false reporting of sexual assaults is occurring at epidemic levels.
"Half of Rape Claims are False," screams a recent press release from a group called RADAR, which stands for Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting. The group backs up this astounding claim with a quote from Linda Fairstein, formerly a prosecutor with the sex crimes unit in New York County.
Feinstein's quote, which has been repeatedly endlessly throughout the blogosphere, holds that half of the rapes annually reported in Manhattan "did not happen." RADAR and others attribute this quote to Feinstein's 1993 book, Sexual Violence: Our War Against Rape...
These tidbits and anecdotes are presented to buttress this blatantly false assertion: "While researchers and prosecutors do not agree on the percentage of false allegations, the consensus is that approximately 40% to 50% of charges are clearly false."
In fact, reliable numbers from law enforcement place the incidence of false reporting for sexual assault at between 2 percent and 8 percent. The incidence of rape victims being doubted and disbelieved is a lot higher than that...
RADAR/Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting:
About Half of Rape Allegations are False, Say Prosecutors and Researchers
comment: Again, it only takes a very small percentage of women, who are willing to lie about rape to create a very big problem. See example - 2% liars equates to 22% false rape allegations.
Duke case: My conclusions on that Summary of Conclusions -- false accuser Crystal Gail Mangum got a pass from the North Carolina Attorney General.
But for her, Mr. Nifong would not have been tempted. And she is still claiming to be a gang-rape victim.
The Summary states: "In agreeing to accept the cases, [Attorney General Cooper] promised a new review of the evidence and additional investigation, and that 'the path that these cases travel will be lighted by the law and the evidence alone."
Reality: Ms. Mangum will not be prosecuted because Attorney General Cooper does not want to offend North Carolina black voters.
Attorney General Cooper suggested Ms. Mangum really believes her false and contradictory claims and admitted that racial considerations affected his decision.
Make no mistake: trying to frame innocent folks is much, much worse than declining to prosecute a false accuser because she is black.
But, Attorney General Cooper is not a fair and objective minister of justice whose decisions are based on "the law and the evidence alone."
Like the original Tawana Brawley, Tawana Brawley Two will not be prosecuted for filing a false report.
That's Democrat politics still at work...