Can someone explain the Mike Nifong case to me?

Question

I'm watching it now and I don't entirely get what's going on; I only started watching it halfway through.

Answer 1

Durham D.A. Mike Nifong has been brought up on ethics charges which states he gave misleading statements to the media and the courts as the the rape case. He is also accused of lying the courts under oath during procedural hearings on the case. On the surface it appears that in his zeal, he persecuted 3 innocent boys to further his political ambitions. So he is essentially on trial for his career and faces anything from censure, suspension to worst for him-disbarrment where his law license is taken away.
1) He went out and gave 73 interviews which called the guys "Hooligans" and " racist thugs". In essence, his statements inflamed racial tensions and also prejudiced the potential jury pool.
Most competent attorneys, either would have said " no comment" or " there seems to have been a crime that was committed and we will follow the evidence to find the truth and justice"
2) In one of his early interviews, he claimed that the players were not cooperating. This was a lie. These guys were clamoring to give up their DNA and spoke with the police readliy
3) He gave an interview in early April, he stated that the DNA testing would exonerate the innocent. It did. The results came back April 10,2006- 8 days before he indicted these boys which clearly showed NONE of the 46 Lacrosse players who were there had deposited saliva or seminal fluid on the alleged accuser. The initial report further stated that they found 4 other deposits of male DNA on and in the accuser which did not match any of the known samples. This included the boyfriend whom she claimed she had not slept with in over a week prior to the attack. Now to be descriptive and clear, sperm survives 3-4 inside a womans body, the samples as described by the DNA specialists had not been degraded which mean they had to have been deposited within that 3-4 day period which showed she was lying from the start
4) He directed how the Durham P.D were to do the police " lineup" where there were no fillers to ensure that the story was true. Fillers are added of people who could not possibly be associated with the case and if the alleged victim had chosen one of them, they would have known it was a hoax. So it was like shooting fish in a barrel- she could not go wrong with choosing a Lacrosse player BUT she went wrong with choosing 2 out of the 3 players. We all knew about Reade Seligman's alibi. After the case was dropped, we also found out about Colin Finnerty's alibi which did not have him in the house at all. He stated he left when she got there, went and bought food, went back to his dorm and was on his cel phone with his sister and he had the proof to back it up.
5)Whether intentional or not, personally I think it was intentional, he needed to get the black voters behind him to win the nomination for Atty General in the primary. It was his first time running for the office ( he had been appointed in 2005) and he was behind in the polls- behind a lady he had fired from the AGs office when he was appointed-Freda Black and desperately needed the black vote. They came out in droves to vote for him.in both the primary and the General Election.
6)He had a 2nd set of testing done by the FBI which ALSO cleared the boys. What he did was take that information and bury it in the 3,000 odd pages he provided to the defense. The DNA testing lab stated in their testimony in Dec that Nifong never requested a final report that would have summarized and included the exculpatory evidence. This they said was the first time that had ever happened.
7)He refused to listen to the former defendants attorneys prior to the indictments when they had information that would have been useful to the case.
8) After the indictments, the attorneys tried again to provide the information and he had told them he was not going to listen to works of fiction- surprising since he had listened to a work of fiction in the first place.
9) He himself NEVER spoke to the accuser until Dec 2006 where her tall tale changed yet again. FIrst her rape started after midnight and one was in front, one had a broomstick and one sodomized her. Then one held her down and she scratched them (none had any scratches and they all had had on short sleeved shirts). Then it was 20, then 3, then 5, then 4 then back to 3 rapists. Now I personally know 2 rape victims and they told me, the minor changes they had in their statements related to the length of time of their moments of hell and clothing type because they were able to see them clearly but things like facial features, those never wavered unlike this liar who descriptions shifted like the sands in the Sahara. The day after speaking with her himself, the rape charges were dropped but the others stayed and he made comments such as " aren't you sorry that you showed me your time line alibi
10) Then when he realized just how much his nuts were in a vice, out came the 2nd time line where the accuser changed the time line to state the attack started 1/2 hour earlier that previousl stated, which was supposed to ensnare Seligman. He did not do due diligence because if he had he would have dropped all charges instead of " staying the course" and turned around and put that female in jail for filing a false police report and committing perjury to the grand jury. The defense lawyers pointed out that there was yet another problem with the time line. At the new time she claimed she was being pushed around and forced into the bathroom and the attack began, she was on her cel phone with her father. So the public was supposed to believe she kept quiet and said nothing to her father while she was being pushed around and being prepped for rape
This was why the State AG took over the case reviewed the evidence that had been collected, dropped the charges and took the unusual step of not just declaring them " not guilty" but declaring them " innocent" of all charges.

Answer 2

Mike Nifong is the District Attorney for Durham County, NC. Last year he was involved in prosecuting a case of alleged rape and sexual assault that took place at a party attended by a majority of the Duke Univ lacrosse team. The accuser was an African American woman hired as an exotic dancer to appear at the party.

Long story short, the case was eventually turned over to the Attorney General's office who, after investigation, dismissed the charges against 3 lacrosse players who had been indicted and charged.

Nifong has been accused of unethical behavior as a prosecutor for making inflamatory comments in the press early on in the case. He has also been charged with ethical violations for withholding DNA evidence that was favorable to the defendants. The case you are watching is an administrative hearing before the NC Bar to consider the ethics charges to see if he violated ethics. IF he is found guilty, he may be censured, disbarred or merely reprimanded. He also may be subject to subsequent actions from the defendants in civil court and there are judges waiting to see the outcome of this hearing to see whether contempt charges (for lying to them in their courtrooms) may be warranted.

Answer 3

well a duke team had a big drunken party ( which is against the law and against the school policy) They hired black strippers and insulted them. The drunkest of the strippers cried rape and mike nifong tried to do his job. There ended up being no rape and even though the drugs and alcohol at the party was mainly used by students under 21 the school took the students part and smeared the DA. it is sad The duke didn't take the right side and punish the student for the underage drinking which should have got them expelled. This is another case where atheletes are shown favorable treatment when they committed a crime.

Answer 4

a little over a year ago a group of lacrosse players from Duke University threw a party and hired a stripper. Later that night the stripper accused them of raping her. There has been a big media flap about it ever since. It turns out that the accusations were false and the boys were found to be innocent. It has also been found that the DA (Nifong) may have tried to stand in the way of giving them a fair trial. He is accused of destroying evidence among other things. He is currently on trial for violating North Carolina's ethics laws.

Answer 5

Short and sweet : He needed publicity to get re-elected - so he abused his office by trying to sacrifice the accused without evidence as to their guilt .