Log in

View Full Version : Duke players cleared of all charges



Pages : 1 [2] 3

Eric Stoner
04-12-2007, 03:27 PM
I haven't read most of thse posts because it sickens me. None of us was there so shove it.

I was raped.

The case was not pursued due to insufficient evidence.

Are you saying I was not raped?

Legal definitions of insufficient evidence do not amount to innocence. Call your local DA and find out.

And another thing, I dare any of you guys to get raped up the ass and not be so mentally fried and stressed that your story gets jumbled in your own head. Talk to therapists about Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. It could be as simple as wait no I opened the door after/before I put my undies back on.

But last time you said before.....

Guys and naive girls who claim that nothing happened: keep believing yourselves, but you weren't there.

I for one don't know what happened, nor do I ignorantly claim to know.

I am truly sorry about what happened to you. You say there was "insufficient evidence". Were you able to ID your attacker ? Was there physical evidence ? Semen ; skin ; hair; anything ? Was it preserved ? Was there an arrest ? Were there any suspects ? You've left dozens of questions open and a lot of issues unresolved. If you'd rather not re-live it I perfectly understand.

You are 100 % correct and in the normal course the D.A. would simply say that: " there is not enough evidence to proceed " or something along those lines. Thus it was highly unusual for the prosecutor in this case to say:" the accused are innocent " and "no crime was committed". That indicates that there was no rape and how badly Nifong ignored his duty to pursue justice.

It might be helpful for a few of you to recall the Scottsboro case where two white women ( one of whom later completely recanted ) falsely accused 9 black men of raping them on a train in Alabama back in the 30's. All were initially convicted and sentenced to death and it took years of re-trials and appeals before they were all freed. In fact, George Wallace pardoned a few of them back in the 70's or 80's.
Or the McMartin case where very young children were manipulated by police and prosecutors into cooking up totally ridiculous and unsupported allegations of child abuse at a day-care center. There was a similar case in New Jersey not too many years ago. All involving serious ALLEGATIONS all of which were later shown to be untrue.

threlayer
04-12-2007, 03:30 PM
Reality is one thing, and what you are able to prove in court is another. That's the way it is in this country. Know a better system? Then reveal it to us all.

BUT-----What SICKENS me is that DA, Nifong, perverting the entire legal system which is supposed to protect both victims and the accused. Nifong is the real criminal in this whole sordid mess. He will pay with his career, but what about the personal cost to those accused? How willl they and their families by reimbursed by Nifong's proven criminal acts? What if they couldn't have funded their defense?

Eric Stoner
04-12-2007, 03:30 PM
According to the FBI, most rape victims (more than 90%) DO NOT see justice served.

In this country, rapists do not go to jail.

The CONVICTED ones almost always do. Fortunately.

Eric Stoner
04-12-2007, 03:39 PM
Reality is one thing, and what you are able to prove in court is another. That's the way it is in this country. Know a better system? Then reveal it to us all.

BUT-----What SICKENS me is that DA, Nifong, perverting the entire legal system which is supposed to protect both victims and the accused. Nifong is the real criminal in this whole sordid mess. He will pay with his career, but what about the personal cost to those accused? How willl they and their families by reimbursed by Nifong's proven criminal acts? What if they couldn't have funded their defense?


That is the REALLY scary part afaic !! and I was impressed that the former defendants acknowledged that they were lucky to have been able to afford a good legal team and voiced concern for others who are not so fortunate. Look at all the people in prison, some on death row, who are later freed by DNA evidence. They usually had a trial - they didn't cop a plea but instead were found guilty by a jury. They had lawyers of varying degrees of competence and it's shocking how incompetent some defense lawyers are. Especially down South.
Especially in capital cases. It's one of many reasons why I oppose the death penalty.

Nifong is not all that unique. There are plenty of other prosecutors out there who forget that it's their duty to pursue justice and not necessarily get a conviction. Hiding exculpatory evidence is not all that uncommon and usually they get away with it. Federal prosecutors especially.

The Police can be just as bad. They invented the term "testilying".

Eric Stoner
04-12-2007, 03:41 PM
Right, silly me. The whore had it coming.

:headache:

I NEVER said any such thing. Kindly re-read what I DID say.

Yekhefah
04-12-2007, 05:45 PM
If that's not what you meant, then what exactly DID you mean? Because it seemed pretty clear to me.

I'm interested in hearing your explanation as to why a student who didn't want her family to know she was stripping would, as a poor black single mother, just randomly make up a false story accusing a group of wealthy white frat boys. I'm also interested in your explanation of the hospital's nurse firm statement that the accuser had indeed been sexually assaulted, and why the broke single mother would've left behind all her things, all her money, and her expensive shoes, and why so many of her fingernails were broken off in the bathroom. Please, enlighten me.

GuyPOV
04-12-2007, 06:05 PM
Innocent till proven guilty doesn't mean someone didn't do something wrong. It just means you have to prove it in the eyes of the court.

I can steal some money tommorrow and if I didn't leave any evidence I'm innocent in the eyes of the court. In the eyes of your religious following guilty as sin.

Clark
04-12-2007, 09:10 PM
Normally, I'd agree with the people saying that maybe something happened, but the simple fact is that prosecutors never issue statements liek this. THis isn't your standard not enough evidence to proceed statement. It's a flat statement that they are innocent with no attempt to even cover the state's ass. If the prosecutor, the guy who's job it was to come up with evidence they were guilty, is that convinced of their innocence, it's good enough for me.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 07:59 AM
If that's not what you meant, then what exactly DID you mean? Because it seemed pretty clear to me.

I'm interested in hearing your explanation as to why a student who didn't want her family to know she was stripping would, as a poor black single mother, just randomly make up a false story accusing a group of wealthy white frat boys. I'm also interested in your explanation of the hospital's nurse firm statement that the accuser had indeed been sexually assaulted, and why the broke single mother would've left behind all her things, all her money, and her expensive shoes, and why so many of her fingernails were broken off in the bathroom. Please, enlighten me.


This was NOT a case totally without any evidence. As to why Ms. Mangum made up her story : 1. She was falling down drunk at the party and there are both photos AND eyewitnesses to prove it. So right away her ability to accurately recall anything is highly questionable. 2.. The nurse was contradicted by the DOCTOR who actually performed the vaginal exam who could neither confirm nor rule out rape. DNA from the semen of no less than 5 ( FIVE ! ) different men was found on the swab test meaning she had unprotected sex with 5 different men ( none of whom were Duke Lacrosse Players ) within 24 to 48 hrs. of the exam. I don't know about you but that would likely cause some signs of some trauma on most vaginas. 3. She has a history of mental illness and of making up similar stories. 4. Both Nifong's and Coopers investigators reported that during their interviews with her Mangum was neither completely lucid nor fully coherent and the consensus was that she was "on something" meaning drugs or a legit prescription.

As to her broken fingernails; it's my understanding that 1 ONE! was retrieved from the frat house and more importantly it did not have anyone else's DNA except hers AND no player had any marks consistent with her having struggled with them- no cuts; no scrapes and no scratches.

Most damning is that when Cooper's investigators met with her and tried to reconcile all her various stories with the physical evidence and showed her photographs taken at the party that contradicted her time after time she reportedly said : "How can that be " and then accused the Duke players ;their lawyers; Duke University and even Nifong of "doctoring" the photos.

There's no doubt in my mind that this woman has serious psychological and emotional problems which probably had a lot to do with why she falsely accused the players in the first place.

Yekhefah
04-13-2007, 08:09 AM
I wouldn't be fully coherent either after being violated by a group of young jocks. I'd probably try to stay as fucked-up as possible for awhile! And perhaps I'm wrong on this, but the last I heard it WAS possible to rape a drunk woman. Just because she was wasted doesn't make her fair game. Same goes for her promiscuity. SO WHAT if she fucked five other guys in the couple of days before the party? That doesn't give a gang of racist jocks the right to hold her down and shove objects up her vag.

I'm not sure where you heard she's made similar accusations in the past that were proven to be false. I'd love to see documentation on that. And I read that it was several fingernails, not one. And why would she leave behind all her money and her expensive shoes if nothing happened?

Maybe the players didn't hurt her. But it sounds to me like SOME guys at that party did. She was in no state to recognize who; if I was being held down and violated while I was drunk, I wouldn't exactly be gazing into the eyes of my attackers.

Bella21
04-13-2007, 08:15 AM
Did she admit that the semen found (from the five different guys) was from consentual sex?

Bella21
04-13-2007, 08:16 AM
Innocent till proven guilty doesn't mean someone didn't do something wrong. It just means you have to prove it in the eyes of the court.

I can steal some money tommorrow and if I didn't leave any evidence I'm innocent in the eyes of the court. In the eyes of your religious following guilty as sin.

Well... yes. I mean, that's obvious. But, I don't see what that has to do with what we're discussing?? /:O Like someone said... it wasn't that there wasn't ENOUGH evidence...

cinammonkisses
04-13-2007, 08:17 AM
Maybe the players didn't hurt her. But it sounds to me like SOME guys at that party did. She was in no state to recognize who; if I was being held down and violated while I was drunk, I wouldn't exactly be gazing into the eyes of my attackers.

Agreed!

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 08:34 AM
What you're forgetting is that there are situations where there are no "real" facts. Just because there is no evidence is not proof that a crime was not committed. It becomes a he said, she said situation and you base your opinion on feeling in that situation. Whether or not the case is in court has no bearing here. We're talking about regular people and their OPINIONS.

Why do we have to constantly point these things out to you? Why do we need to prove to you that other scenarios exist beyond the ones you have set your mind on?

Here's another scene. We happen to believe that murder is wrong. Other cultures might not believe the same thing. That's their opinion and this is ours. Is one of them wrong? No, it's a cultural difference...essentially, their OPINION.

So, tell us again how the "real" world works...or really, don't you mean YOUR world?

Starting with your latter point first. I think you fail to make an important distinction between opinions based on facts and those based on values. Assuming there is such a culture that holds the opinion that murder is a good thing ( the Thugs of Colonial India ; the Assassins of Turkey; Ninja in Japan ) that's based on VALUES.
There's no empirical analysis that murder is "good" and btw the killing tolerated is that of outsiders ; traitors or its done for economic benefit- a fee. The argument against it is based on a different set of values and differing moral view about is or is not acceptable in civilized society BUT I could also construct a fact based argument showing that more people draw greater benefit from a more peaceful society and that both short and long term the "murderous " society would benefit by mending its ways.

Your first argument is almost surreal. Are you seriously arguing for arrests and prosecutions without any evidence ? Ought there not be some minimal corroboration to support allegations of such a serious crime as RAPE ? The case we've been discussing was far from a "he said-she said " situation. It was a case where there was NOT ANY credible evidence whatsoever.

Arguments such as you've been making about "feelings" and emotional considerations genuinely trouble me because we are talking about what ought to be a rational, objective system of justice which ought to have as its ultimate goal the administration of justice based on truth seeking. If I underatnd you and some others correctly, you are arguing that it ought to be akin to ART CRITICISM and that emotional reactions to perceived situations and scenarios ought to carry at least some weight. I'm very sorry but I simply can't accept that and can't understand how and why anyone wanting a civilized society would be willing to accept anything of the sort.

Rather than get bogged down in a metaphysical or philosophical debate over such concepts as "truth" I've tried to argue from simply a practical and realistic POV. Were it you in the dock accused of something you knew you didn't do;would you want the "feelings" of your accuser or the jury or the judge to matter one whit ? I can't see how you would . Would you want a fair-minded prosecutor
who decided whether or not to indict you based on a rational analysis of the available facts or one who did so based on sympathy for your accuser ?
Would you want to be tried in the newspapers or in a courtroom ?

JustJayda
04-13-2007, 08:36 AM
I And why would she leave behind all her money and her expensive shoes if nothing happened?



THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 08:52 AM
I wouldn't be fully coherent either after being violated by a group of young jocks. I'd probably try to stay as fucked-up as possible for awhile! And perhaps I'm wrong on this, but the last I heard it WAS possible to rape a drunk woman. Just because she was wasted doesn't make her fair game. Same goes for her promiscuity. SO WHAT if she fucked five other guys in the couple of days before the party? That doesn't give a gang of racist jocks the right to hold her down and shove objects up her vag.

I'm not sure where you heard she's made similar accusations in the past that were proven to be false. I'd love to see documentation on that. And I read that it was several fingernails, not one. And why would she leave behind all her money and her expensive shoes if nothing happened?

Maybe the players didn't hurt her. But it sounds to me like SOME guys at that party did. She was in no state to recognize who; if I was being held down and violated while I was drunk, I wouldn't exactly be gazing into the eyes of my attackers.

Violated how ? Btw, aren't you forgetting the use of the dildo during Ms. Mangum's show ?
You're deliberately misunderstanding me on both the intoxication and other sexual activity issue. No ! Being drunk does not make her "fair game" or mean it was not possible for her to have been raped. It does mean that her recollections are questionable on their face and in light of her ever changing story coupled with contradictory evidence they' re in fact not worthy of belief.
The 5 other men plus her use of the dildo would have accounted for the EXTERIOR appearance of her vagina that the nurse reported.
She left her stuff behind because she was too whacked out to remember them.
Wouldn't you be able to remember the face of your attacker ? She wasn't knocked unconscious.

Why are you so anxious to believe her ?

Do you believe the accuser of the "Scottsboro Boys" ?

Do you believe every estranged husband who accuses his wife of sexually abusing their children ? Or just when he says she's physically abusing them ?

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 08:55 AM
Did she admit that the semen found (from the five different guys) was from consentual sex?

What do you think it was from ? It didn't match anyone at the party .
Are you claiming she was gang-raped BEFORE she went to the party ?

DylanAngel
04-13-2007, 08:56 AM
Starting with your latter point first. I think you fail to make an important distinction between opinions based on facts and those based on values. Assuming there is such a culture that holds the opinion that murder is a good thing ( the Thugs of Colonial India ; the Assassins of Turkey; Ninja in Japan ) that's based on VALUES.
There's no empirical analysis that murder is "good" and btw the killing tolerated is that of outsiders ; traitors or its done for economic benefit- a fee. The argument against it is based on a different set of values and differing moral view about is or is not acceptable in civilized society BUT I could also construct a fact based argument showing that more people draw greater benefit from a more peaceful society and that both short and long term the "murderous " society would benefit by mending its ways.

Your first argument is almost surreal. Are you seriously arguing for arrests and prosecutions without any evidence ? Ought there not be some minimal corroboration to support allegations of such a serious crime as RAPE ? The case we've been discussing was far from a "he said-she said " situation. It was a case where there was NOT ANY credible evidence whatsoever.

Arguments such as you've been making about "feelings" and emotional considerations genuinely trouble me because we are talking about what ought to be a rational, objective system of justice which ought to have as its ultimate goal the administration of justice based on truth seeking. If I underatnd you and some others correctly, you are arguing that it ought to be akin to ART CRITICISM and that emotional reactions to perceived situations and scenarios ought to carry at least some weight. I'm very sorry but I simply can't accept that and can't understand how and why anyone wanting a civilized society would be willing to accept anything of the sort.

Rather than get bogged down in a metaphysical or philosophical debate over such concepts as "truth" I've tried to argue from simply a practical and realistic POV. Were it you in the dock accused of something you knew you didn't do;would you want the "feelings" of your accuser or the jury or the judge to matter one whit ? I can't see how you would . Would you want a fair-minded prosecutor
who decided whether or not to indict you based on a rational analysis of the available facts or one who did so based on sympathy for your accuser ?
Would you want to be tried in the newspapers or in a courtroom ?

You have a serious problem with reading comprehension Eric. READ MY POST. I was speaking about OTHER situations besides court cases and STATED SO IN MY POST.

The argument I posted is regarding OPINIONS in situations, and say this with me, OTHER THAN COURT CASES. You have argued both me and Bella regarding your "opinion" of what opinions mean. You believe they are based on fact and I happen to believe that there are other variables.

You should check your color pallette...there are other things besides black and white. And unless you learn to read and comprehend like an adult instead of doing the Evelyn Wood speed reading of my posts, don't even bother anymore. You and your "opinion" don't exist to me anymore.

Bella21
04-13-2007, 09:01 AM
What do you think it was from ? It didn't match anyone at the party .
Are you claiming she was gang-raped BEFORE she went to the party ?

Noooo. I'm not claiming anything. I'm asking a question because the possibility that she was raped before after or during the party and figured it was a better idea to blame the players (or thought it was the players?) popped into my head... but I didn't have the info so I asked the question.

Yekhefah
04-13-2007, 09:03 AM
Violated how ? Btw, aren't you forgetting the use of the dildo during Ms. Mangum's show ?

This is the first I've heard of a dildo. I'd ask you for documentation, but I asked you for documentation before and you haven't provided it, so I won't bother this time. Anyway, making the gratuitous assumption that there was a dildo, what difference does it make?


She left her stuff behind because she was too whacked out to remember them.

Right, it was just a regular night at work and she had a little too much to drink, which is why she ran outside half-naked and screaming and forgot all her money, her shoes, and all her other belongings. Do you REALLY believe that?


Wouldn't you be able to remember the face of your attacker ? She wasn't knocked unconscious.

Who knows? The original evidence suggested she was held face-down, which would make it pretty hard to see. Rape is sufficiently traumatic that a lot of victims' brains block out as much of it as they can, and are unable to make a 100% positive ID after the fact. This is why most rapists get away with it.


Why are you so anxious to believe her ?

I'm not, I'm just looking at what I see. Why are you so anxious to believe she's a liar?


Do you believe the accuser of the "Scottsboro Boys" ?

Obviously not, as those women (there were two) admitted they were lying and there was clear evidence to prove that, and we have several decades of hindsight between then and now. The Scottsboro case isn't the one we're discussing here.


Do you believe every estranged husband who accuses his wife of sexually abusing their children ? Or just when he says she's physically abusing them ?

I am not personally familiar with the details of any such cases, but again, those aren't the ones we're discussing. Please try to stay on topic.

Yekhefah
04-13-2007, 09:06 AM
What do you think it was from ? It didn't match anyone at the party .
Are you claiming she was gang-raped BEFORE she went to the party ?

You don't know it didn't match anyone at the party. We just know it didn't match anyone who was TESTED. Come on, it's Duke University and these are athletes and wealthy frat boys. Do you REALLY think that anyone who assaulted her at the party would've actually had his own semen tested?

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 09:11 AM
I wouldn't be fully coherent either after being violated by a group of young jocks. I'd probably try to stay as fucked-up as possible for awhile! And perhaps I'm wrong on this, but the last I heard it WAS possible to rape a drunk woman. Just because she was wasted doesn't make her fair game. Same goes for her promiscuity. SO WHAT if she fucked five other guys in the couple of days before the party? That doesn't give a gang of racist jocks the right to hold her down and shove objects up her vag.

I'm not sure where you heard she's made similar accusations in the past that were proven to be false. I'd love to see documentation on that. And I read that it was several fingernails, not one. And why would she leave behind all her money and her expensive shoes if nothing happened?

Maybe the players didn't hurt her. But it sounds to me like SOME guys at that party did. She was in no state to recognize who; if I was being held down and violated while I was drunk, I wouldn't exactly be gazing into the eyes of my attackers.


Re-read Sitri's post and links of 4/11 on her history of making shaky allegations among other things.

Let's assume there were plenty of rowdy jerks at the party and I'm sure there were. Let's assume a few of them were crude ; maybe even cruel - real "Don Imus" fans making similar type remarks- maybe even racist stuff. Let's assume all of that ( and I'm sure there was some of that ) and that Ms. Mangum was hurt and insulted and even felt degraded.
She COULD have just tried to get even by reporting under-age drinking or even lewd activity. She could have left in a huff midway through her scheduled show. She could have claimed she was a victim of "hate speech" ( very popular on many campuses today btw ) and accused everyone there of rude and insensitive behavior and gotten them all in some sort of disciplinary trouble with Duke. And I wouldn't have a problem with anything she chose to do along those lines.

That's not what she did. And you know it.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 09:14 AM
You don't know it didn't match anyone at the party. We just know it didn't match anyone who was TESTED. Come on, it's Duke University and these are athletes and wealthy frat boys. Do you REALLY think that anyone who assaulted her at the party would've actually had his own semen tested?

Every WHITE player on the Duke Lacrosse team submitted DNA samples.

Have you really and seriously followed this case and familiarized yourself with the reported facts and what came out in open Court proceedings ? It doesn't appear that you have.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 09:22 AM
What you're forgetting is that there are situations where there are no "real" facts. Just because there is no evidence is not proof that a crime was not committed. It becomes a he said, she said situation and you base your opinion on feeling in that situation. Whether or not the case is in court has no bearing here. We're talking about regular people and their OPINIONS.

Why do we have to constantly point these things out to you? Why do we need to prove to you that other scenarios exist beyond the ones you have set your mind on?

Here's another scene. We happen to believe that murder is wrong. Other cultures might not believe the same thing. That's their opinion and this is ours. Is one of them wrong? No, it's a cultural difference...essentially, their OPINION.

So, tell us again how the "real" world works...or really, don't you mean YOUR world?

THIS is the post I responded to. If I overreached and misapplied your argument to the current Duke case then I may have misunderstood you. But I have to admit that when you say things such as : "Why do we need to prove to you that other scenarios exist ... " I assume that you're talking about the Duke case and that you're suggesting that there ARE plausible scenarios that support Ms. Mangum's accusations.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 12:02 PM
This is the first I've heard of a dildo. I'd ask you for documentation, but I asked you for documentation before and you haven't provided it, so I won't bother this time. Anyway, making the gratuitous assumption that there was a dildo, what difference does it make?



Right, it was just a regular night at work and she had a little too much to drink, which is why she ran outside half-naked and screaming and forgot all her money, her shoes, and all her other belongings. Do you REALLY believe that?



Who knows? The original evidence suggested she was held face-down, which would make it pretty hard to see. Rape is sufficiently traumatic that a lot of victims' brains block out as much of it as they can, and are unable to make a 100% positive ID after the fact. This is why most rapists get away with it.



I'm not, I'm just looking at what I see. Why are you so anxious to believe she's a liar?



Obviously not, as those women (there were two) admitted they were lying and there was clear evidence to prove that, and we have several decades of hindsight between then and now. The Scottsboro case isn't the one we're discussing here.



I am not personally familiar with the details of any such cases, but again, those aren't the ones we're discussing. Please try to stay on topic.


Are you at all familiar with the facts of this case and what the other dancer says happened at the party ?

Who says she ran around naked and screaming ? Not her fellow dancer and why would she lie.?

If she was held face down then she wouldn't be able to positively ID any actual
rapists would she ? Not w/o eyes in the back of her head ? You wouldn't be trying to have it both ways , would you ?

WHAT do you see that bolsters her credibility or supports her story ? For my part I see no reason to believe her BUT early on; as the story was initially breaking, I DID believe her. Not for too long. but at first I thought those guys were guilty.

You've botched the facts of the Scottsboro Case. One of the two white women accusers ( Ruby Bates) recanted at the first re-trial. The other ( Victoria Price)never did and went to her grave claiming to have been raped. The facts of the case haven't changed from the
1930's up until the present. No new evidence came to light from the first re-trial up until now. An all white jury voted to convict based solely on the word of one white woman and nothing else. 5 of the 9 ended up doing time for a crime that never occurred. All were eventually released, pardoned or paroled.

I'm sorry to do this but if all the other facts were the same as what's come to light in the Duke case except Mangum were white and the accused black; would you still believe she was raped ?

Look at current custody and divorce cases and there are lots of allegations about physical and sexual abuse flying back and forth.

cinammonkisses
04-13-2007, 12:14 PM
Every WHITE player on the Duke Lacrosse team submitted DNA samples.

Have you really and seriously followed this case and familiarized yourself with the reported facts and what came out in open Court proceedings ? It doesn't appear that you have.

But the party included more than just the Duke players! That is the point Yek was trying to make.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 12:20 PM
This is the first I've heard of a dildo. I'd ask you for documentation, but I asked you for documentation before and you haven't provided it, so I won't bother this time. Anyway, making the gratuitous assumption that there was a dildo, what difference does it make?



Right, it was just a regular night at work and she had a little too much to drink, which is why she ran outside half-naked and screaming and forgot all her money, her shoes, and all her other belongings. Do you REALLY believe that?



Who knows? The original evidence suggested she was held face-down, which would make it pretty hard to see. Rape is sufficiently traumatic that a lot of victims' brains block out as much of it as they can, and are unable to make a 100% positive ID after the fact. This is why most rapists get away with it.



I'm not, I'm just looking at what I see. Why are you so anxious to believe she's a liar?



Obviously not, as those women (there were two) admitted they were lying and there was clear evidence to prove that, and we have several decades of hindsight between then and now. The Scottsboro case isn't the one we're discussing here.



I am not personally familiar with the details of any such cases, but again, those aren't the ones we're discussing. Please try to stay on topic.


Are you at all familiar with the facts of this case and what the other dancer says happened at the party ?

Who says she ran around naked and screaming ? Not Kim Roberts ,her fellow dancer and why would she lie.?

If she was held face down then she wouldn't be able to positively ID any actual rapists would she ? Not w/o eyes in the back of her head ? You wouldn't be trying to have it both ways , would you ? Btw, most rapes do NOT get reported. When they are, too often they are handled by hospital and police personnel untrained in how to properly handle and deal with the victim. With DNA evidence and/or a credible victim and corroboration coupled with Rape Shield Laws the conviction rate is rather good. The other side of the coin are all the innocent men freed after years of imprisonment when subsquent DNA testing shows they could not have been the rapist.

WHAT do you see that bolsters her credibility or supports her story ? For my part I see no reason to believe her BUT early on; as the story was initially breaking I DID believe her. Not for too long. But at first, I believed her.

You've botched the facts of the Scottsboro Case. One of the two white women accusers recanted at the first re-trial. The other never did and went to her grave claiming to have been raped. The facts of the case haven't changed from the 1930's up until the present. No new evidence came to light from the first re-trial up until now. An all white jury voted to convict based solely on the word of one white woman and nothing else.

I'm sorry to do this but if all the other facts were the same as what's come to light in the Duke case except if Mangum were white and the accused black; would you still believe she was raped ?

Look at current custody and divorce cases and there are lots of allegations about physical and sexual abuse flying back and forth.

JustJayda
04-13-2007, 12:26 PM
But the party included more than just the Duke players! That is the point Yek was trying to make.

Excellent point, c'mon, do we think only the team members were at the party people????

leilanicandy
04-13-2007, 12:27 PM
I cant help but to wonder if they payed everyone off. I dont think the the duke boys where all that good of boys. Those boys are typical bullies. Just to throw a thought out there, the boys raping women at the school. Really is bad for the school rep. not to mention the boys whom rape the girl. How they rep is affected. I just assume that they paid this woman off! This is usually how they get rid of their promblems.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 12:33 PM
But the party included more than just the Duke players! That is the point Yek was trying to make.

Oh ? What's THIS based on ? Non- Duke students at a Duke frat party ?
Just how divorced from the known facts are you prepared to be to support
Ms. Mangum's allegations ?

natrlyst
04-13-2007, 12:33 PM
Please try to remain rational about the facts of this case and not be blinded by emotion. Please also have faith in the system and not contrive conspiracy theories. Making assumptions that the girl was paid off only throws shit in the wind of the process. Why did the prosecutor make a public apology to the Duke players? The charges were dropped because the girl admitted to lying, enough said...

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 12:34 PM
Excellent point, c'mon, do we think only the team members were at the party people????

None of us were there. All those who were there were questioned by the police.

JustJayda
04-13-2007, 12:36 PM
Oh ? What's THIS based on ? Non- Duke students at a Duke frat party ?
Just how divorced from the known facts are you prepared to be to support
Ms. Mangum's allegations ?

I can't answer 4 Cin on this one, but umm she didn't say non Duke students Eric. She said non-Duke players.

C'mon, there were other fellas there besides the team members!

JustJayda
04-13-2007, 12:38 PM
None of us were there. All those who were there were questioned by the police.

how do u know that? Did a magical gate spring up from the ground and trap everyone there, until the police arrived and questioned them?

Do you know how many times (back in my day) I fled "the scene" when something popped off?

JustJayda
04-13-2007, 12:39 PM
Eric your faith and blind belief in the American Legal & Justice systems is "hot"!

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 12:40 PM
I cant help but to wonder if they payed everyone off. I dont think the the duke boys where all that good of boys. Those boys are typical bullies. Just to throw a thought out there, the boys raping women at the school. Really is bad for the school rep. not to mention the boys whom rape the girl. How they rep is affected. I just assume that they paid this woman off! This is usually how they get rid of their promblems.

Prove it !

You're throwing out the possibility that WHO paid her off ? Duke ? The same people who suspended the three players and cancelled the entire 2006 Lacrosse Season and fired the coach ? That Duke ? Where 88 professors signed an open letter and took out a full page ad supporting the accuser and attacking the players ?

Has Oliver Stone been heard from on this case ?

How about Farrakhan and the "Mother Wheel" ?

Any CIA involvement ?

Could there have been black helicopters flying that night ?

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 12:45 PM
how do u know that? Did a magical gate spring up from the ground and trap everyone there, until the police arrived and questioned them?

Do you know how many times (back in my day) I fled "the scene" when something popped off?

Ah, I see. "Mystery rapists". That lends credibility to Ms. Mangum; how ?

Anything's conceptually possible. We could cook up dozens of possible scenarios and point the finger at lots of people but for doing what ? Where's the evidence she was even raped in the first place ?.

Sitri
04-13-2007, 12:49 PM
Excellent point, c'mon, do we think only the team members were at the party people????

So now we have a second rapist on the grassy knoll??/:O And perhaps he used invisible paint and time traveled? Are we sure she wasn't kidnapped by aliens or someone from the "Hero's" TV show?

Or, since she was found drunk in her car in a parking lot, how come it wasn't her driver that took advantage of her and left her there? She already admitted to having sex with him? Why are you so hooked into burning the Duke boys in effigy?

I think when you have to start making up your own conspiracy theories, it's time to write fiction. It's not a matter of "thinking" what may have occurred or making up your own theory, it's a matter of our justice process being conducted fairly for all parties involved -- the accuser and the accused.

Let's be clear that I am not defending any rapist. They should all be punished. I am however offended about how the whole investigation was conducted.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 12:52 PM
Eric your faith and blind belief in the American Legal & Justice systems is "hot"!

Actually I place little faith and trust in the American Legal & Justice systems.
Basically I think they suck BUT when you look around the world at other systems
then it looks halfway decent by comparison.

Too many cops are dim-wit doofs who haven't got a clue.

Too many Nifongs get themselves elected.

Too many lazy, dumb and gutless judges on the bench.

Too many innocent people in prison; even on death row.

Too many guilty people walking around.

Too many sloppy and lazy reporters who just parrot what the police and prosecutors say and lead the rush to judgement.

Too much ignorance about the Constitution. etc. etc.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 12:55 PM
So now we have a second rapist on the grassy knoll??/:O And perhaps he used invisible paint and time traveled? Are we sure she wasn't kidnapped by aliens or someone from the "Hero's" TV show?

Or, since she was found drunk in her car in a parking lot, how come it wasn't her driver that took advantage of her and left her there? She already admitted to having sex with him? Why are you so hooked into burning the Duke boys in effigy?

I think when you have to start making up your own conspiracy theories, it's time to write fiction. It's not a matter of "thinking" what may have occurred or making up your own theory, it's a matter of our justice process being conducted fairly for all parties involved -- the accuser and the accused.

Let's be clear that I am not defending any rapist. They should all be punished. I am however offended about how the whole investigation was conducted.


Thank you. At least one poster familiar with the facts and not cooking up conspiracy theories.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 01:36 PM
I can't answer 4 Cin on this one, but umm she didn't say non Duke students Eric. She said non-Duke players.

C'mon, there were other fellas there besides the team members!

And they escaped identification and questioning , HOW ?

If some of you gals want to bitch about Nifong and the cops doing a lousy job; I won't argue with you. If they had done a proper job there never would have been much of a story in the first place.

leilanicandy
04-13-2007, 02:08 PM
Prove it !

You're throwing out the possibility that WHO paid her off ? Duke ? The same people who suspended the three players and cancelled the entire 2006 Lacrosse Season and fired the coach ? That Duke ? Where 88 professors signed an open letter and took out a full page ad supporting the accuser and attacking the players ?

Has Oliver Stone been heard from on this case ?

How about Farrakhan and the "Mother Wheel" ?

Any CIA involvement ?

Could there have been black helicopters flying that night ?


WHOA boy!

I dont think the school paid her off! I just think that the players parents might have paid to keep her quiet. Or paid someone in the DA office to mess things up. WHen dealing with rich people. Sometimes things go like that to hide thier bones in thier closet. Yea she could have just been a money hungry woman blaming me for rape to get money. Or a woman who is crazy who think they rape her, because she have delusion in her head that are not true. I am just wondering what really happen. Why it happen the way it happen.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 02:52 PM
WHOA boy!

I dont think the school paid her off! I just think that the players parents might have paid to keep her quiet. Or paid someone in the DA office to mess things up. WHen dealing with rich people. Sometimes things go like that to hide thier bones in thier closet. Yea she could have just been a money hungry woman blaming me for rape to get money. Or a woman who is crazy who think they rape her, because she have delusion in her head that are not true. I am just wondering what really happen. Why it happen the way it happen.

Well then they didn't get much for their money because as late as last week Mangum was asking Cooper's office to proceed.
Paid someone with the D.A. to mess up how ? Do you think they paid Nifong direct ? To throw away his entire career and get himself disbarred ?

What they DID do was hire good lawyers for their sons. If you'll recall it was months before the defense started discussing this case OUTSIDE of Court; unlike Nifong. They responded to Nifong's repeated public statements and as revelation after revelation became public the tide of Public Opinion shifted. Slowly at first and eventualy to the present point where nobody familiar with the case believes the accuser at all and almost everyone doubts anything happened to her that night except she drank alcohol after taking flexeril ( a muscle relaxant ) and did a strip show after escorting with three different men before the party- according to HER !
She passed out in her car; then had a fight with Roberts who called the police when Mangum refused to get out. The police tok her to a facility for alcoholics and drug addicts so she could dry out and sober up and AFTER she did she was taken to Duke Medical Center when she for the first time claimed to have been raped by "FIVE Men".
Read the Wikipedia article on this case. Look at the "60 Minutes" interview with Roberts. Remember Nifong's POLITICAL situation. He was locked in a tough close primary for re-election.
The nonsense getting posted is sadly reminiscent of the "O.J." case. At the time most Black Americans polled thought he was innocent and had been framed by the LAPD. Now, most think he is guilty. Every time I asked a black person- "how did Nicole's blood get on O.J.'s clothes; or on his car" they couldn't answer me. His blood at the murder scene they claimed was "planted" by Fuhrman and the LAPD but they could never explain where they got it from to do that. Or why they'd want to frame him .

Before that it was Tawana Brawley.

DylanAngel
04-13-2007, 03:06 PM
The nonsense getting posted is sadly reminiscent of the "O.J." case. At the time most Black Americans polled thought he was innocent and had been framed by the LAPD. Now, most think he is guilty. Every time I asked a black person- "how did Nicole's blood get on O.J.'s clothes; or on his car" they couldn't answer me. His blood at the murder scene they claimed was "planted" by Fuhrman and the LAPD but they could never explain where they got it from to do that. Or why they'd want to frame him .

Before that it was Tawana Brawley.

Oh and we know that every single poll out there is completely honest and true. C'mon, my degree and career are in Marketing and it's my job to find focus groups that will answer my questions favorably. It's my job to manipulate sell through data to show a product in a more favorable light.

But it's the second sentence that I bolded that chills me. I know plenty of AA people who thought he was guilty. You are making the Duke case into a racial thing. We arguing it from a male/female standpoint. Or at the very least a class thing.

I've figured out what's been bothering me about you. You're not a new poster are you?

Yekhefah
04-13-2007, 03:06 PM
Are you at all familiar with the facts of this case and what the other dancer says happened at the party ?

Why is the other dancer so much more credible than the alleged victim? Was she a sober virgin or something?


If she was held face down then she wouldn't be able to positively ID any actual rapists would she ? Not w/o eyes in the back of her head ? You wouldn't be trying to have it both ways , would you ?

No, I'm not; that's the fucking POINT, Eric. I said I believe she was violated, and there's no telling who did it since she wasn't in a position to be able to see or ID anyone. Pay attention.


WHAT do you see that bolsters her credibility or supports her story ?

I already listed it all off. Go back and read through the thread if you forgot.


You've botched the facts of the Scottsboro Case.

Who gives a shit? Like I said, Scottsboro is not the case we're discussing. It was decades ago and AFAIK everyone involved is dead. So who gives a fuck? It has no relevance to this discussion.


I'm sorry to do this but if all the other facts were the same as what's come to light in the Duke case except if Mangum were white and the accused black; would you still believe she was raped ?

Yeah, because you know me, I'm all about the race-baiting. ::) If you paid one ounce of attention to anything I post here, then you'd know I don't give SFA about race. Black, white, purple, it's all the same to me.


Look at current custody and divorce cases and there are lots of allegations about physical and sexual abuse flying back and forth.

And that has WHAT to do with this discussion, exactly?

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 03:27 PM
Oh and we know that every single poll out there is completely honest and true. C'mon, my degree and career are in Marketing and it's my job to find focus groups that will answer my questions favorably. It's my job to manipulate sell through data to show a product in a more favorable light.

But it's the second sentence that I bolded that chills me. I know plenty of AA people who thought he was guilty. You are making the Duke case into a racial thing. We arguing it from a male/female standpoint. Or at the very least a class thing.

I've figured out what's been bothering me about you. You're not a new poster are you?

Are you ? Then answer MY questions- What if Mangum was white ?

If you believe her why not believe Victoria Price in the Scottsboro Case ?

I do NOT want this to be a racial thing and I think it's unfortunate that it APPEARS that support for Mangum APPEARS to be breaking down along ethnic lines. It's nothing more than an observation on my part. Call me a "Utopian" but I'd love to have a truly "color blind" justice system and think it's sad that we do not.
I didn't make this case into a "racial thing". Jackson, Sharpton and The New Black Panther Party did with their public statements.
You want to make it a "gender thing"? You think that's healthy ?
You want to argue it from a "class standpoint" ? How does that have ANYTHING to do with what the evidence in this case is? Or more accurately, how does it have anything to do with the lack of evidence ?
I admit that the Duke palyers benefitted greatly from being able to afford good lawyers and posted to that effect. They publicly cknowledged same at their news conference and like me expressed concern for less fortunate defendants who were also innocent but could not afford good lawyers.
As to O.J.; back in 1995 when Cochrane did his job and got him off and Marcia Clark and Chris Darden blew the case MOST African Americans polled said they thought he was innocent and that he'd been framed. More recent polls show quite a different view of O.J. among African Americans polled. That's what the poll numbers said.
When I discussed the case with African Americans back in 1995 most said they thought he was not guilty. In more recent discussions their view has changed. How is that my fault ?

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 03:42 PM
Why is the other dancer so much more credible than the alleged victim? Was she a sober virgin or something?



No, I'm not; that's the fucking POINT, Eric. I said I believe she was violated, and there's no telling who did it since she wasn't in a position to be able to see or ID anyone. Pay attention.



I already listed it all off. Go back and read through the thread if you forgot.



Who gives a shit? Like I said, Scottsboro is not the case we're discussing. It was decades ago and AFAIK everyone involved is dead. So who gives a fuck? It has no relevance to this discussion.



Yeah, because you know me, I'm all about the race-baiting. ::) If you paid one ounce of attention to anything I post here, then you'd know I don't give SFA about race. Black, white, purple, it's all the same to me.



And that has WHAT to do with this discussion, exactly?

Roberts managed to stay sober throughout and her version has proven to be the more credible. It never changed unlike Mangum's.

If Mangum never looked or saw her attackers then how could she righteously ID ANYBODY ?

I'm sorry if I missed your listing of corroboration for Mangum. No need to repeatit. just please point me to the post by date or number and I'll read it myself.

I brought up the Scottsboro case as an example of what can happen to people based on nothing more than groundless accusations, How much damage can be caused to real PROPLE when others tell lies and those lies are accepted instead of properly challenged. One reason the Scottsboro boys got a re-trial was because to avoid a lynching the governor of Alabama promised the cracker white folks a speedy trial and speedy executions.

Likewise I've pointed to a well documented abuse of the legal system by both mothers and fathers locked in vicious matrimonial and custody disputes where they trade accusations of child abuse; both physical and sexual where too many times an otherwise innocent parent has to fend off such unsubstantiated charges.

I've continually asked you and a few others to document or support your SUSPICIONS and afaic they are nothing more than that-unsupported suspicions. To date , you have not. Please feel free and try to post something besides just unsupported hypothetical possibilities.

DylanAngel
04-13-2007, 03:46 PM
Are you ? Then answer MY questions- What if Mangum was white ?

If you believe her why not believe Victoria Price in the Scottsboro Case ?

I do NOT want this to be a racial thing and I think it's unfortunate that it APPEARS that support for Mangum APPEARS to be breaking down along ethnic lines. It's nothing more than an observation on my part. Call me a "Utopian" but I'd love to have a truly "color blind" justice system and think it's sad that we do not.
I didn't make this case into a "racial thing". Jackson, Sharpton and The New Black Panther Party did with their public statements.
You want to make it a "gender thing"? You think that's healthy ?
You want to argue it from a "class standpoint" ? How does that have ANYTHING to do with what the evidence in this case is? Or more accurately, how does it have anything to do with the lack of evidence ?
I admit that the Duke palyers benefitted greatly from being able to afford good lawyers and posted to that effect. They publicly cknowledged same at their news conference and like me expressed concern for less fortunate defendants who were also innocent but could not afford good lawyers.
As to O.J.; back in 1995 when Cochrane did his job and got him off and Marcia Clark and Chris Darden blew the case MOST African Americans polled said they thought he was innocent and that he'd been framed. More recent polls show quite a different view of O.J. among African Americans polled. That's what the poll numbers said.
When I discussed the case with African Americans back in 1995 most said they thought he was not guilty. In more recent discussions their view has changed. How is that my fault ?

You still didn't answer my question. Doesn't matter, I know who you are and who you were back then. I originally joined here in 2003 and didn't post much. Came back and joined up again in 05 under another name figuring my old account was closed (it wasn't).

My first point is that, in going back over your posts over the years, you have been nothing but argumentative and your main venue is gone with the closing of Political Poo.

My second point is that you will argue till the other person backs out from disgust. It's your MO. I've seen it for a long time now. So now I know that, it's not worth it go back and forth with you unless I truly have nothing better to do with my time.

As for your question of "Why is that my fault?". There ya go again! When did I ever say anything was YOUR FAULT. I know Marketing and pointed out an industry strategy to you.

Eric Stoner
04-13-2007, 03:55 PM
You still didn't answer my question. Doesn't matter, I know who you are and who you were back then. I originally joined here in 2003 and didn't post much. Came back and joined up again in 05 under another name figuring my old account was closed (it wasn't).

My first point is that, in going back over your posts over the years, you have been nothing but argumentative and your main venue is gone with the closing of Political Poo.

My second point is that you will argue till the other person backs out from disgust. It's your MO. I've seen it for a long time now. So now I know that, it's not worth it go back and forth with you unless I truly have nothing better to do with my time.

As for your question of "Why is that my fault?". There ya go again! When did I ever say anything was YOUR FAULT. I know Marketing and pointed out an industry strategy to you.

I'm sorry and I'm not trying to be argumentative but I'm missing your point on the marketing angle. What industry strategy are you talking about ?

As for who you think I am or was or whatever- feel free. That's YOUR opinion to which you have an absolute right.

DylanAngel
04-13-2007, 04:01 PM
I'm sorry and I'm not trying to be argumentative but I'm missing your point on the marketing angle. What industry strategy are you talking about ?

As for who you think I am or was or whatever- feel free. That's YOUR opinion to which you have an absolute right.

You're being obtuse again Eric.

I discussed research and polls above when you mentioned about the blacks being polled in re: the OJ case. Skewing those results and not taking a proper cross section of subjects is a popular Marketing strategy employed by every company that manufactures a product.

As for who you were. It's not my place to out you. You know who you were and so do I. Maybe you shouldn't have left your old profile up for people to compare the two.

You were argumentative and poo-ish then and you are now. Only difference is the venue.