A committee is a thing which takes a week to do what one good man can do in an hour. — Elbert Hubbard (1856 - 1915)Updated — today's items:
Forum topic of note:
Replay of the Whicky Committee, * B A M B O O Z L E D * -- It's worse the second go-round. I saw some definite mistakes and another odd thing is apparent. Everyone seems to believe Himan's self serving claims that he was hesitant in regard to indicting Seligmann...
I see a whole lot of people that were bamboozled by Himan and I'm shocked that so many were willing to believe him when he never asked Crystal one hard question and never approached Crystal's story with the slightest bit of critical analysis...
Rewatching the meeting - it's horrible.
Not only didn't the members know basics about the case - quite a few quoted Baker's report and quoted the defenses already made by the Police on the case...WRAL Video Gallery:
Special-Committee Meeting on Durham Police Duke Lacrosse Probe -- [9 parts]
Man Convicted of Rape, Freed, Won't Have New Trial -- ANTIGO, Wis. -- A man who served nearly 10 years in prison for raping a teenage girl before a judge freed him because he didn't get a fair trial will not be tried again, a prosecutor decided Monday.
Jeffrey J. Dake, 37, of Deerbrook, was released from prison in June after the Wisconsin Innocence Project at the University of Wisconsin Law School convinced a judge that he deserved a new trial on two counts of second-degree sexual assault of a child.
Langlade County District Attorney Ralph Uttke filed a motion Monday dismissing the charges.
Then Judge Fred Kawalski said the words Dake wanted to hear.
"You can go," Kawalski said without comment.
"After spending 10 long years in the state prison for a crime I did not commit, I do not have any animosities toward anyone," Dake said later, "although I feel I was 'Nifonged."'
He referred to North Carolina prosecutor Mike Nifong who has been disbarred after three members of the Duke lacrosse team were cleared of rape charges he pursued against them...
New lineup rules pass -- Past injustices lead legislators to change the way witnesses make identifications -- Misidentification by eyewitnesses helped lead to wrongful convictions and lengthy imprisonments for Darryl Hunt and Ronald Cotton, cases that have become familiar to many in North Carolina. In the Duke lacrosse case, police used a flawed photo lineup to indict three players accused of rape.
In response, state lawmakers gave final approval Monday night to a bill that sets procedures that law enforcement officers must follow when conducting a lineup. The changes include making a video recording of the proceedings and protections against police officers' inadvertently -- or purposely -- steering an eyewitness to pick a person.
"It's a near certainty that there will be a reduction in mistaken eyewitness identification," Gary Wells, an eyewitness identification expert, said about the bill. "The cases that come along after this will be more pristine and more trustworthy. So not only will it save some innocent people from ever getting to that point, but it also makes sure that guilty parties are convicted."
If Gov. Mike Easley signs the act into law, it will take effect March 1, 2008. The bill sailed through the House and Senate with no dissenting votes...
N.C. Lawmakers Approve Uniform Standards for Photo Lineups -- The way police conduct photo lineups will soon change. State lawmakers gave final approval to a bill that requires departments to follow uniform procedures statewide. The new legislation could have helped the Duke lacrosse case.
Most law enforcement agencies already use suggested guidelines, but House Bill 1625 makes it a requirement. One some legislators say is needed to keep innocent people out of jail.
When police asked Crystal Mangum to identify her attackers, they only showed her pictures of Duke lacrosse players. The person who conducted that lineup was also involved in the investigation. The new bill would make both of those acts illegal...
Two Chiefs for the Price of Two Chiefs -- [cartoon]
The Times: Still Misleading -- Editors of the two newspapers with the worst coverage of the case took different approaches in dealing with the AJR’s comprehensive review of how the media handled events in Durham...
The Times editor didn’t even try to defend sports columnists Selena Roberts or Harvey Araton...
Keller, on the other hand, was less willing to cast blame in evaluating his paper’s news division...
The Times has, to date, refused to correct this item [racial epithet made in house] (along with at least two other items from the August 25 story). Nor has the paper ever produced evidence for its assertion.Given that record—and given his own inaccurate portrayal of the Gottlieb report—how can Keller lecture anyone on the need to provide “more, better reporting”?