Durham's Shameful Sham--No Apologies Offered

Washington, DC (TLS). A flurry of activity has ensued in the aftermath of Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong's decision to drop the charges of rape against the three Duke lacrosse students. As Nifong's ill-conceived and sham of a case unravels against the three young men, defense attorneys have demanded that the charges against their clients be dropped, Duke has reinstated two of the accused who have yet to graduate, the North Carolina bar has charged Nifong with ethics violations, and the North Carolina Association of District Attorneys has called for Nifong to remove himself from the case.

Duke's President has also called for Nifong's removal.

This could be the least of Nifong's problems, however. The U.S. Department of Justice is continuing its investigation into charges of prosecutorial misconduct on the part of the D.A.'s office in Durham. Not only could Nifong face disbarment but he could also find himself in one pickle of a mess if it is determined that criminal charges should be filed against him.

A scheme of false accusations, innuendo, character assassination, and the framing of three young men for political gain is a poison octopus whose tentacles reach far into the N.C. Judicial System and the N.C. Democrat Party. To date, neither the Judge in the case, nor anyone in any position of authority has taken the necessary steps to reign in and squelch one of the biggest hoaxes in the history of the American criminal justice system.

Not only that, but the usual suspects continue to defend their actions in the face of the tsunami of criticism being leveled at everyone involved in any way in the Nifong debacle. Dr. Cathy Davidson, a Duke professor who jumped on the lynch-mob bandwagon early on, has written a letter to the Raleigh News and Observer in which she not only absolves herself of any wrongdoing in her attempt to incite the Durham black community to riot, but continues to engage in rhetoric that is clearly aimed at subtlely vilifying the three young men who have yet to be found guilty of anything. Davidson and her cohorts in the N.C. mainstream media, as well as other demagogues such as activists in the 'Black Muslim' movement who suggest that proclaiming the three white lacrosse players guilty even before a trial is payback for years during which Black females were falsely charged, continue their assault against the young men.

Davidson's letter is filled with righteous indignation concerning the fact that three college students would engage in 'sleazy behavior' while at the same time defending the black accuser as an 'exotic dancer.' She castigates the behavior of the students while granting a pass to a prostitute/stripper.

How are the actions of the accuser any less sleazy than those of the accused?

Davidson also lashes out at 'hooligan bloggers' who decry her behavior and statements, as well as that of others who have been a part of this travesty of justice. She writes the following:

'On the other hand, most of my e-mail comes from right-wing "blog hooligans." These hateful, ranting and sometimes even threatening folks don't care about Duke or the lacrosse players. Their aim is to make academics and liberals look ridiculous and uncaring. They deliberately misrepresent the faculty and manipulate the feelings of those who care about the lacrosse players in order to foster their own demagogic political agenda. They contribute to the problem, not to the solution.'

This behavior seems to be the standard fare we can now expect from the blind Nifong apologists who seem determined to lynch three young white guys as payback for despicable atrocities committed against Blacks in the nation's past. One such apologist appeared on 'The O'Reilley Factor' this week, a Black Muslim, who spouted some of the most hateful vitriol one can imagine against the three lacrosse players. When pressed by O'Reilley about his statements in March and April about the students, the man refused to apologize for any of his actions or statements in attempting to incite the Durham community to racial riots. This is all in spite of the fact that Nifong has yet to present any evidence that implicates the defendants in a crime.

Engaging in behavior that is immature, ill-advised, and less than moral is a far cry from criminal behavior. Somehow these people seem to think the two are one and the same.

Not according to the law.

Thus, we have a prosecuting attorney who is out of control and purely politically motivated. We have an accuser who has changed her story repeatedly and has been 'outed' by close friends who describe her as a woman scorned who was on a mission to 'get money owed to her by some Duke students.' We have the clear proof of Nifong and a lab specialist engaging in collusion to withhold DNA evidence that clears the defendants of the rape charges.

This is not to mention the ongoing investigations by federal and state officials and the chorus of voices rising against Nifong within the legal community.

Frankly, it is difficult to comprehend that at this date, after all that has occurred, there are still those in the Durham community who deny their contribution to one of the biggest shams in the history of American jurisprudence.