Exonerated Duke suspect awaits fresh start at Brown

Brown Daily Herald:

[Reade Seligmann, of Duke lacrosse fame/notoriety] plans to study history at Brown and is considering adding economics as a second concentration. His internship at Bear Stearns has gotten him more interested in business, he says, but his heart, especially after the past year, is in law.

Seligmann knows some resent the three accused players for having the resources to battle the legal system. He is unapologetic about it, but after the Duke case, he realizes more than ever how economics plays a role in law.

Seligmann says he and the two accused teammates plan to one day work with the Innocence Project, a nonprofit organization dedicated to exonerating prisoners through DNA testing, or something similar.

His goal, he says, is to work toward making sure that something like the Duke case never happens again, that innocent people never have to go through what he went through, regardless of their financial situation.

At Brown, he promises to start a club related to the Innocence Project, and to devote much of his time to its cause.

When asked if he's comfortable making a promise, with the Brown community and much of the nation watching, Seligmann doesn't hesitate to respond.

'They'll be watching me anyway,' he says.

Duke Reaches Settlement With Players

From The New York Times:

DURHAM, N.C. (AP) --

Duke University has reached an undisclosed financial settlement with three former lacrosse players falsely accused of rape, the school said Monday.

Duke suspended Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and Dave Evans after they were charged last year with raping a stripper at an off-campus party. The university also canceled the team's season and forced their coach to resign.

''We welcomed their exoneration and deeply regret the difficult year they and their families have had to endure,'' the school said in a statement. ''These young men and their families have been the subject of intense scrutiny that has taken a heavy toll.''...

The players' families racked up millions of dollars of legal bills in their defense, and appear likely to file a lawsuit against Nifong.

The players said in a joint statement that they hoped the agreement would ''begin to bring the Duke family back together again.''

''The events of the last year tore the Duke community apart, and forcibly separated us from the university we love,'' they said. ''We were the victims of a rogue prosecutor concerned only with winning an election, and others determined to railroad three Duke lacrosse players and to diminish the reputation of Duke University.''

One wonders whether the terms will emerge...
Meanwhile, Nifong has been disbarred, and deserves worse.

Duke Case Prosecutor Says He Will Resign

From The New York Times: By DUFF WILSON and JOHN HOLUSHA

RALEIGH, N.C. June 15 — Durham County district attorney Michael B. Nifong said today he plans to resign his job, after admitting that he had “crossed the line” of ethical standards in some of the public statements he made about the Duke University lacrosse players he charged with rape.

An emotional Mr. Nifong made his announcement on the stand at the end of several hours of testimony in a state bar association hearing on whether he had violated ethical standards for prosecutors.

He apologized to the families of the Duke students he had charged, and for any harm he had done to the criminal justice system in North Carolina. And choking back tears, he added that he did not lie in his handling of the case, and he would continue to defend himself against allegations that he had.

Joe Cheshire, a lawyer for one of the Duke defendants, said afterward “I believe it’s a cynical, political attempt to save his law license. His apology is far too late.”

Mr. Nifong said that the last 14 months have been very hard on him and his family, as it has been the families of the men who were accused of rape.

Too bad about his family.
But this probably kills that senior Justice Dept. appointment. Bushies never apologize, let alone resign.

Duke Case Prosecutor Admits He 'Crossed the Line'

From The New York Times: By DUFF WILSON and JOHN HOLUSHA

RALEIGH, N.C. June 15 — Durham County district attorney Michael B. Nifong admitted today that he “crossed the line” of ethical standards in some of the public statements he made about the Duke University lacrosse players he charged with rape.

But he said other mistakes made in the case, including mishandling evidence and not turning favorable DNA tests over to defense lawyers, were based on his inexperience in handling felony cases and oversight.

He said he had not handled a felony case since 1999, concentrating on traffic offenses in recent years....

Mr. Nifong, 56, is a 29-year veteran of the district attorney’s office. He was appointed to the top job in April 2005 by Governor Mike Easley after his predecessor became a judge.

Mr. Nifong brought the rape charges while he was in an election contest against a better known former assistant district attorney. The bar accused him of pressing the rape case for political reasons.

Sounds like Nifong is now ready for a senior appointment in the Bush/Gonzales Justice Department. He's doing a heck of a job!

Duke: Rueful reflections begin...

Broadsheet - Salon.com:

The case has proved to be a litmus test for individual feelings about rape cases. Some spectators were quick to discount the accusations and call the accuser a lying whore; others automatically offered her support and the benefit of the doubt. Neither camp really knew what went on at the ill-fated party, because it's impossible for anyone other than those present to know for sure.
[This is true, in a technical sense, in the vast majority of disputes. But does there come a time that reasonable outside observers can no longer responsibly avoid making some judgments about the credibility of differing accounts?]
But the 13-month media circus surrounding the Duke case didn't help matters. Many news outlets -- including, in some instances, Broadsheet -- were quick to side with the accuser. On the flip side, there are also ample examples of media coverage firmly in the other camp. Beyond Tucker Carlson's predictable tirade, there was musing about lacrosstitutes and some egregious blame-the-victim coverage.
[And now? Just who are the primary (if not morally guiltless) "victims" here? Is it time to give the "blaming the victim"rhetoric a bit of a rest, and to move toward a more sophisticated assessment of what are often complex and messy circumstances?]
Reasonable arguments about presumed innocence sometimes wandered into less reasonable arguments that certain women are asking for rape, or that accusers should be silenced because they might be lying.
[What would you suggest as the appropriate balance as such cases develop in real time? What criteria would you apply?]

The polarized responses to the case dredge up a peculiar tension regarding rape allegations: It's critical that the accused are presumed innocent, but it's also important that accusers are offered support and the assurance that someone believes them [Is every story worthy of belief?]; that's a key part of post-assault counseling. [Should that always be the highest priority?]These priorities aren't necessarily mutually exclusive -- supporting an accuser isn't the same as convicting an alleged perpetrator, and ultimately we'd like to believe that even in cases of conflicting reports the truth will come out. [That would be nice. The evidence suggests otherwise, especially when the accused lack resources for an effective defense.]

I don't have the answers here; I am struggling like the rest of us. But maybe we can agree on the necessity of moving past the unreflective, knee-jerk responses on both sides. Legal due process does have something to be said for it.

La-Crossing Duke and Imus

Charges against the three Duke lacrosse players once accused of rape and other offenses were finally, and properly, dropped today after an investigation by the North Carolina Attorney General. The A.G. decided not to pursue charges against their accuser. The local prosecutor, Mike Nifong, faces a disciplinary hearing before the State Bar.

I will accord Nifong the presumption of innocence, which he rather cavalierly seems to have denied to the accused. Nonetheless, from present evidence, he seems to have demonstrated the qualities of competence, forthrightness, and freedom from political considerations that would qualify him for a senior position in the Bush/Gonzales Justice Department.

All that said, and recognizing the costs and personal trauma wrongly imposed on the players by apparently false accusations and an out-of-control prosecutor, I am not inclined to lionize the players (or many of their teammates) as heroes. Their party, featuring hired strippers, was disgusting, and should be recognized as such, even if their actions were not criminal.

Just the kind of adolescent frat party environment that provides a receptive audience for the raunchier, racist and sexist side of a Don Imus routine. Probably also the breeding ground for future shock-jocks.

Perhaps someone can explain the schizophrenic (with no offense to the mentally ill intended) character of the Imus phenomenon: How can it be that the Imus show (and little else short of Charlie Rose), for all its offensive and insulting shtick, also provides a regular venue for intelligent, relatively prolonged, and relatively unpretentious conversations with so many thoughtful journalists, politicians, and authors? Playboy used to pay a lot for (mostly) bad pieces by marquee authors. What does Imus offer? Can't someone without all of Imus' baggage offer serious, informative, and intelligent conversation in the morning? (Yes, mostly I listen to--and contribute to-- NPR, but during pledge weeks?)

Imus' recent comments--like the Duke party a year ago--were sexist, racist and disgusting, and deserve the strong negative response they are now receiving. But our culture seems to have an inexhaustible appetite for coarse, insulting, and degrading performances by comedians, entertainers, sports figures, and politicians, among others. Maybe we, the public, deserve what we support, and what we get.