Nifong Disbarred!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Jun 17 2007, 12:20 AM) [snapback]463326[/snapback]</div>

I'd like to see Nifong go to the same facility he tried his best to send the students. No protective custody, just throw him in with the general population. I'm sure "Bubba" there will be able to perform an attitude correction. Should anything actually happen to Nifong while in prison at least he will know how to file a complaint. However, IMO the legal fraternity will watch out for their own and he won't spend a day as a guest of the state.

 

good... but we're still getting out of here asap.

 

Besides sending Nifong to jail....

Let me go a few steps further...

The plaintif should be his cellmate, and....

the 88 duke professors that signed that letter should be stripped of tenure and have to write on the blackboard 500 times - innocent until proven guilty, and,

duke university should have to pay some sort of monetary penalty to the lacrosse team coach and the kids who were penalized by the cancellation of the season. and

the press who casitigated and crucified these boys - should have to find some other field of work...

 

Don't forget about Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Have they made their public apologies yet?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jun 18 2007, 10:09 AM) [snapback]463969[/snapback]</div>

Wow, hindsight is 20/20, eh Berman?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Jun 18 2007, 11:29 AM) [snapback]463983[/snapback]</div>

not hindsight - common sense. i assume you enjoyed seeing those INNOCENT [until proven guilty] young while males tortured for a year, have their lives ruined, face 30 years in prison, and spend millions of $'s on their legal defense? Who will re-imburse them for their legal costs??

I would also change the rape laws - we have swung tooooo far over to protect the plaintif while running over the normal checks and balances defendants normally enjoy.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jun 18 2007, 11:34 AM) [snapback]463986[/snapback]</div>

wow nicely said..... B)

 

One thing that stood out to me in this case is how dreadfully tilted our legal system is toward the wealthy. The two lacrosse players were really only able to beat this charge because their parents had the money to fight the wrongful charges. As was mentioned in an earlier post, their familes spend untold sums of money defending their children.

However, the outcome might have been quite different had the familes not had the financial resources to hire a top-notch criminal defense attorney. If these two kids had not come from wealthy families, they might have very well sitting behind bars. Sad but true.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Swanny1172 @ Jun 18 2007, 12:44 PM) [snapback]464041[/snapback]</div>

While it's obvious that you can win in court if you have money, nevertheless, it's also obvious, at least to me, that rather than being tilted towards the wealthy, it is, in fact tilted towards guilty until proven innocent. Then, the only ones who CAN defend themselves are the ones with money. You've come to the right conclusion from the wrong direction: A system that presumes that you're guilty can only be defended against if one has the money to do so. If you don't have the money, you're in trouble. Do you recall what the cost was to those families? It was at least in the six figures for each. Sure, they had the money.

I don't know what the fonger's motivation was but incompetence certainly seems to be a big factor. He believed a stripper with mental problems? What's wrong with you, Nifong, never met any strippers before? Are you naive or just plain stupid?

 

at the time this happened, the whole city was littered with these eyesore political "let's keep mike nifong district attorney" signs.

that should say it all: election time.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(galaxee @ Jun 18 2007, 01:27 PM) [snapback]464087[/snapback]</div>

Maybe I'm missing something, galaxee. Is the city predominantly black? Going after affluent white kids on the word of a black stripper seems rather bizarre, otherwise.

 

I have to agree with Dr Berman (that's a first) the Duke Professors should be roundly castigated for their premature conviction of the Lacrosse players. This country was founded on innocent until proven guilty. This has been erroded over the last several years with everyone jumping to conclusions and flying off the handle with little or no information in hand. Mr. Nifong was attempting to make his bones on what, at first blush he thought was a slam dunk case. He like everyone in the media and Sharpton and Jackson who should know better let fly with inflamatory invectives. Not only has Sharpton & Jackson not apologized but neither has the media.

 

eh, it's hard to describe. it seems sometimes like multiple distinct towns that somehow occupy the same area... but in short, to answer your question, yes- there are a large number of black durhamites.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(galaxee @ Jun 18 2007, 01:36 PM) [snapback]464097[/snapback]</div>

Good thing it was never brought to trial then. With the OJ trial as an example, the kids would probably have been convicted even with lack of real evidence and an unstable stripper and her "colleague" as the only witnesses. Sort of refutes the idea that money is the only thing that influences the outcome of a jury trial.

 

well i don't know if i'd go that far, Jack. there are also examples of all kinds of other races, financial backgrounds, educational backgrounds here. though it would have made being on that jury very difficult, for sure.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JackDodge @ Jun 18 2007, 01:43 PM) [snapback]464104[/snapback]</div>

You are assuming that the jury representation of blacks would have been just about equal to their percentage of population in the area. Don't forget the jury pools are drawn from registered voters in most states and that blacks have a notoriously low percentage of registered voters...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Swanny1172 @ Jun 18 2007, 01:59 PM) [snapback]464116[/snapback]</div>

enh B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JimN @ Jun 17 2007, 11:33 PM) [snapback]463754[/snapback]</div>

You're right. The maximum penalty in NC is disbarment. One of the talk shows said last week that recently a DA here in NC was found guilty of knowingly prosecuting a murder case that sent the innocent defendant to death row. He got reprimanded - no disbarment. :angry: