Drop the Charges

Now drop the rest of the charges:

The Durham district attorney dropped rape charges against three former Duke lacrosse players on Friday, but he said he would continue to pursue kidnapping and sexual offense charges that carry equally stiff sentences.

The woman, who said she was attacked while performing as a stripper at a lacrosse team party last March, has repeatedly asserted that she endured violent penile penetration. She said this to the first doctor who saw her, to the sexual-assault nurse, to the sexual-assault doctor, to detectives and in her own handwritten statement to the police, records show. She also consistently said she was forced onto her hands and knees and raped from behind.

Yet when questioned again on Thursday afternoon by Mr. Nifong’s investigator, the woman said for the first time that she could no longer be sure what had penetrated her.

Mr. Nifong said her uncertainty required him to act.

“Since there is no scientific or other evidence independent of the victim’s testimony that would corroborate specifically penetration by a penis, the state is unable to meet its burden of proof with respect to this offense,” he said in court papers.

The onlyreason these other charges remain is to provide Nifong with some cover after his egregious race-baiting and handling of this case. Drop the rest of the charges and prosecute Nifong, if you ask me.






60 replies
  1. 1
    ThymeZone says:

    What would Jesus Darrell do?

  2. 2
    Darrell says:

    ThymeZone Says:

    What would Jesus Darrell do?

    I haven’t been following this story closely enough.. I thought DNA evidence had exonerated them months ago. Nifong needs to let the rape and kidnapping charges drop.. but shouldn’t there be some criminal penalty imposed on those players for hiring such skanks in the first place? They need to be taught an important life lesson not to cut corners when hiring whores and strippers.

  3. 3
  4. 4
    matt says:

    Why is the particular story so popular on lefty and righty blogs? Is it the race thing? the money thing? It’s a seemingly apolitical story that I can’t seem to get away from on the political blogs I read.

    The left had these guys tried and convicted the moment the story broke, and now the right is breaking out the champaign that the “case” fell apart.

    It’s just weird.

  5. 5
    David M. says:

    Why is the particular story so popular on lefty and righty blogs? Is it the race thing? the money thing? It’s a seemingly apolitical story that I can’t seem to get away from on the political blogs I read.

    Maybe it’s a sports thing. Or a college thing. Does anyone know the generalized political leanings of Duke University?

  6. 6
    ThymeZone says:

    Not that weird. In the blogosphere, everything is about scoring points against the other side.

    The actual merits of the issues don’t matter that much.

  7. 7
    David M. says:

    Not that weird. In the blogosphere, everything is about scoring points against the other side.

    Yes, but how are the sides even defined, here? Is Duke University a Republican school, so that Democrats will leap on a scandal emanating therefrom? Is the GOP notoriously pro-sports, and therefore likelier to defend sports players? How does politics even seep into this debate?

  8. 8
    ThymeZone says:

    Well, if there is any racial component to the story, the left is going to start turning over race cards as fast as it can. It’s a knee-jerk, almost slavish reaction that goes way beyond PC and becomes almost a caricature of itself.

    You will see it right here on the pages of BJ. No charge of racism will ever go unmade, and then undefended to the last breath, by some of the left here.

    I am, just so you know, a lifelong Dem and rabid liberal by trade, so I am talking about my own team here.

    Truth is, when it comes to race, it’s hard to know which side is the most ridiculous and dogmatic. On balance, I’d have to say the left is, but that might just be because I hang around more liberals and hear their bullshit more.

    When racism is on the radar, I’m embarrassed to be on the left. But the right is even more disgusting, using race to taunt the all-too-willing left with the issue, and then of course supporting policies that are bad for the minorities and the poor.

    Talk about the lesser of two weevils!

  9. 9
    Bruce in Alta California says:

    Talk about the lesser of two weevils!

    Oh quite right. I opted out of the two party system when California went to the open primary system. Although the Libertarians espoused many goals that I value, I settled in to the Green Party.

    Fast forward two primaries later. The Rep/Dem duopoly has managed to cut the legs off the open primary system and my local Greens continuously bicker over minor crap so as to completely undermine any chance of growth.

    I am now registered as “decline to state” so that I can request any party’s primary ballot to participate in. As example, I would have liked to vote against John Doolittle in his primary election although I supported Charlie Brown in the general election.

  10. 10
    Paul L. says:

    Why is the particular story so popular on lefty and righty blogs? Is it the race thing? the money thing? It’s a seemingly apolitical story that I can’t seem to get away from on the political blogs I read.

    When the story started the radical feminists and race hustler (some at Duke) had some members of the Duke Lacrosse team already had found guilty and convicted. The story was that Duke Lacrosse team was a bunch of arrogant out of control rich white jocks. The feminists and black panthers were having marches and protests at Duke. A group of 88 Duke professors signed a statement saying the Duke Lacrosse players were guilty. The MSM was repeating that story and had the players convicted. At first, I was ready to believe them to be guilty. But I started following the story when the DNA evidence claim back negative and Nifong’s (who is a democrat) behavior (all his media statements/rigged photo lineup/ignoring player’s alibis ) came to light. From the evidence, it appears that the rape can not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The case shows the disingenuousness of the politically correct left. Evidence be dammed. Those rich white bastards are guilty. The narrative is all that counts.
    i.e. Nancy Grace still thinks they are guilty.

    Mary Katharine Ham says it best.

    It’s Durham. It’s full of a bunch of liberal white people who love to get yelled at by black people, and a bunch of liberal black people who are happy to oblige them. This story scratched that white guilt itch soooo good, they just couldn’t let it go, even though it was pretty clear from the beginning that the story was a little off.

    The national media liked the white, privileged, lax boys rape hard-working, exotic dancer, single mom story, and they ran with it, too. As a result, many lives, seasons, careers, and a successful sports program have been seriously messed with by a D.A. who couldn’t back off on the narrative, either, lest he feel the wrath at the ballot box from those whom he denied their white guilt orgy.

    Also check out the Durham-in-Wonderland blog for more on Nifong, his media enablers and the Duke group of 88.
    http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/

  11. 11
    Zifnab says:

    Well, if there is any racial component to the story, the left is going to start turning over race cards as fast as it can. It’s a knee-jerk, almost slavish reaction that goes way beyond PC and becomes almost a caricature of itself.

    You will see it right here on the pages of BJ. No charge of racism will ever go unmade, and then undefended to the last breath, by some of the left here.

    This is a classic OJ situation. When you’ve got both sides lying and both sides acting wrongly, it’s very difficult to pick out who to punish and who to let walk.

    OJ killed two people and Mark Ferman tried to frame him for it anyway. They’re both sleezeballs.

    In this case, you’ve got a DA trying to look like the Black Man’s best friend and you’ve got a horde of slavoring wingnuts heckling from the sidelines that “she was asking for it” and lamenting the epidemic of rich white lacross players being disenfranchised of their rights to get shitfaced and act like retards.

    So it’s easy for the right to call the girl a whore for being a stripper, then lying about being raped – because she is, she did, and she’s a bad person for her action. And its easy for the left to call the right a pack of racist, elitest goons who wouldn’t know justice if it bukkaked them across the face. Because they are and they wouldn’t.

    Everyone deserves derrision so its fertile ground for everyone to sling mud. And with turf this ripe, how can the modern MSM not obsess of a half-year old non-story? It’s not like they have an obligation to actually cover the news or anything.

  12. 12
    The Other Andrew says:

    I don’t get the importance of this, either. Cops and DAs frequently go over the line, except this time, it happened to well-to-do white athletes.

    If the DA involved did engage in misconduct, he should absolutely lose his job, and/or have charges filed against him. I think that should happen in all such cases, but most don’t seem to get this much play on talk radio, for some mysterious reason. (insert rolling-eyes emoticon here)

  13. 13
    ThymeZone says:

    OJ killed two people and Mark Ferman tried to frame him for it anyway. They’re both sleezeballs.

    Precisely.

    And Furman, of course, has made an industry of his dishonest behavior because everybody who isn’t a damned fool knows that OJ is guilty.

    And that’s my point, sort of. If one can’t make the distinction here, which is that Furman IS a racist, but he was right about OJ, but he was wrong to frame OJ, and because he did and because the LAPD and DA didn’t have the sense to run away from Furman …. OJ goes free.

    That’s what happens when you play the race card in the wrong way or at the wrong time. Sure, a few black people went “Yes! Brutha got off!” But a lot of other people went “Fuck, the system doesn’t work.”

    The latter is greater tragedy. A lot of killers get away with murder. But we like to think that our system is the best one we can employ, and the OJ case is not really a big confidence builder. Is it okay that Brutha Got Off because a lot of brothers got railroaded, or got lousy defense, or got lynched, or got pushed around by cops for no reason other than being black? No. The truth is, we need a strong system that doesn’t depend on Furmans to get justice. Furman is the reason why OJ is free.

    The trouble with a lot of people on the left, though, is that they can’t tell gratuitous race-baiting from real racism. They have no clue, maybe because they have never seen or experienced real racism. Or because they don’t know what it is. It isn’t about politics.

  14. 14
    Redleg says:

    There is still plenty of real racism to go around that we need not attend to the spurious charges. What most annoys me is that many conservatives act as though racism and sexism are things of the past. In fact, many recent empirical studies have shown that employers and lenders still discriminate on the basis of race.

    On the other hand, it is annoying how easily people accuse others of racism without really knowing the motives behind an action. To me the Duke case was more about socio-economic class than race. Does anyone really expect the Duke lacrosse players to get convicted even if they really did do the crime?

  15. 15
    Paul L. says:

    Zifnab Says:
    you’ve got a horde of slavoring wingnuts heckling from the sidelines that “she was asking for it” and lamenting the epidemic of rich white lacross players being disenfranchised of their rights to get shitfaced and act like retards.

    I do not care if the accuser is a whore or stripper. Is she lying?

    How do you address the following:
    1) Multiple conflicting stories from the accuser
    2) No DNA evidence of the rape.
    3) The rigged lineup (pick a Duke Lacrosse member)
    4) Alibi of one of the accused. Eyewitness and video evidence of the accused nowhere near the scene of the crime when the rape occurred.
    5) And now the DA plotting with a lab to hide exculpatory evidence (DNA from five, unidentified males from in the rape kit) from the defense.

    You think the rich white bastards are guilty and you are pissed because the evidence says they are not.

  16. 16
    cleek says:

    The case shows the disingenuousness of the politically correct left…

    zzzzzz

  17. 17
    OCSteve says:

    And that’s my point, sort of. If one can’t make the distinction here, which is that Furman IS a racist, but he was right about OJ, but he was wrong to frame OJ, and because he did and because the LAPD and DA didn’t have the sense to run away from Furman …. OJ goes free.

    Well put.

    Maybe it’s a sports thing. Or a college thing. Does anyone know the generalized political leanings of Duke University?

    Durham native Mary Katharine Ham

    It’s Durham. It’s full of a bunch of liberal white people who love to get yelled at by black people, and a bunch of liberal black people who are happy to oblige them. This story scratched that white guilt itch soooo good, they just couldn’t let it go, even though it was pretty clear from the beginning that the story was a little off.
    The national media liked the white, privileged, lax boys rape hard-working, exotic dancer, single mom story, and they ran with it, too. As a result, many lives, seasons, careers, and a successful sports program have been seriously messed with by a D.A. who couldn’t back off on the narrative, either, lest he feel the wrath at the ballot box from those whom he denied their white guilt orgy.
    Take it from me. That’s pretty much what happened.

    Update: For those of you laboring under the misapprehension that Nifong will face a recall or charges for his misbehavior, or that Duke President Brodhead will face consequences for offering up the Duke lacrosse players and the entire lacrosse program on the altar of political correctness, without evidence, think again.
    Durham is not a normal place where people pay normal consequences for bad behavior. As many have noted, the sexual assault and kidnapping charges stand, even though they were predicated on the rape charge in the first place (which, even the accuser’s not real sure about these days).

    Why keep the other charges? I have long thought that the good people of Durham will not rest until these boys are punished, and Nifong has been unable, thus far, to let them off the hook because he’s not willing to give up his D.A. slot for standing up for innocent white guys, which would undoubtedly be the result (not to mention possible race riots) if he did. So many prominent folks in Durham– community leaders black and white, Duke faculty, the Duke president, and Nifong himself–all crawled so far out on a limb on this that it became very hard to sneak back to the tree trunk.
    So, let the two lesser charges stand, and see if you can get a jury full of Durham folks who will convict the boys because it fits the narrative? I’m just afraid he might actually succeed. K.C. Johnson thinks it’s the beginning of the end of the case. Geez, I hope so, but I grew up in Durham. Forgive me if I’m not as hopeful.
    I guarantee you, even if they’re let off the hook in criminal court, they’ll face a jury of their picketing peers at Duke who will lecture them and make them undergo sensitivity training for allegedly using the n-word before their lives were ruined by the race-baiting D.A. from Durham. But, here’s hoping for better than that.

  18. 18
    OCSteve says:

    Sorry for reposting the MKH link – I didn’t catch that Paul had highlighted it already. NTS – Read all comments before commenting.

  19. 19

    That’s what happens when you play the race card in the wrong way or at the wrong time. Sure, a few black people went “Yes! Brutha got off!” But a lot of other people went “Fuck, the system doesn’t work.”

    Actually the system did work.

    A rich white athelete in the same position would have gotten off. So the OJ thing was an example that racism has died, and black men receive the same treatment as white.

  20. 20
    Pb says:

    Drop the rest of the charges and prosecute Nifong, if you ask me.

    If he did drop the rest of the charges, then I’m sure they would try to prosecute Nifong. But as someone in Durham who voted for Nifong, I say, if he thinks he still has a case, then let him try his case in a court of law. If he loses, if it gets thrown out, or what have you, then so be it, then you can break out the pitchforks. In short: if you don’t think he has a case, then what are you so afraid of? Let him try and fail, then.

  21. 21
    Pb says:

    Heh. Poor MK, no one loves her…

  22. 22
    demimondian says:

    OC! Dude, welcome back! Where’ve you been?

  23. 23

    When the story started the radical feminists and race hustler (some at Duke) had some members of the Duke Lacrosse team already had found guilty and convicted.

    Ahh, but convicting someone on the basis of no evidence is by and large a bi-partisan activity.

    Maybe I’m the only American left who generally waits for the trial, and for the jury to convict someone before I think of them as guilty.

  24. 24
    ThymeZone says:

    Yes, OC, post more, early, and often.

    Happy Festivus,too.

  25. 25
    Zifnab says:

    You think the rich white bastards are guilty and you are pissed because the evidence says they are not.

    Not at all. I think the rich white bastards hired the wrong stripper. I’m not pissed in the least that the evidence will see justice upheld.

    I am pissed that this entire incident has given the Limbaughs and Savages of the world an opportunity to classify black women as “hos” and play to the “rich white people are always innocent” vibe, just because in this particular incident the woman was a ho and the guys were innocent. The Lacross Team story gives wingnuts an opportunity to label all black allegations of abuse by white people fraudulant. So next time a little black girl gets raped down in Alabama by a bunch of drunken KKK fuckwads, or a black man gets dragged to death off the back of some hick’s car in Texas, the local community can write the whole thing off as just another case of Duke Lacross hysteria.

  26. 26
    OCSteve says:

    OC! Dude, welcome back! Where’ve you been?

    You folks just wore me out after a while. I don’t have the stamina I guess :) As the elections got nearer and things got more heated I took a break from here (I stopped by the front page but stayed out of comments). I gave up commenting most places except ObWi. Not that they cut me any slack :) I was doing a little introspection I guess, and it seemed to work better limiting it to one blog. Nothing against you folks (or John or Tim), but Hilzoy is a phenomenal writer and she drew me in (against my will many days).

    Anyway, with our new Democratic Congress I’m sure I’ll be around more often. I voted for them. I plan to hold them to account (yes, more than I tended to do with this last batch of boobs.)

    ThymeZone: Happy Festivus to you too!

  27. 27

    Great story over at Mankato Free Press about Tim Walz going to Congress. His students at the high school threw a big party.

    I got to meet him before the election. He was incredible, and one of the good things that came from this 2006 election.

  28. 28
    CaseyL says:

    The charges were incendiary; Nifong really had to take them seriously.

    The fact that he kept flogging the case after it started to fall apart doesn’t have as much to do with partisan politics as it does with the prosecutor mindset. DAs as a species hate to admit error, particularly when a case goes high-profile.

    There have been a lot of famous instances over the last few years of someone convicted of first degree murder, and evidence comes out later about collusion, suppression of exculpatory evidence, coerced confessions (esp. from mentally disabled defendents), and so on. Yet even after the person wrongly convicted has had their case reviewed by a court and then set free, the prosecutors (and police) generally still refuse to admit they were wrong.

    I don’t know why they do that. It doesn’t make them look strong and resolute. It makes them look incompetent and corrupt.

  29. 29
    David M. says:

    I don’t know why they do that. It doesn’t make them look strong and resolute. It makes them look incompetent and corrupt.

    Who knows, though? Just because someone is set free after review doesn’t mean he or she isn’t guilty. And just because someone had exculpatory evidence suppressed or a confession beaten out of them doesn’t mean they didn’t commit the crime. (Cf. Fuhrman, OJ, as discussed above.)

    Obviously, they’re being set free on grounds of Constitutional rights. But that doesn’t mean they didn’t really do it.

  30. 30
    Pb says:

    Who knows, though?

    Nancy Grace probably thinks she does.

    Just because someone is set free after review doesn’t mean he or she isn’t guilty. And just because someone had exculpatory evidence suppressed or a confession beaten out of them doesn’t mean they didn’t commit the crime.

    …and that’s just what she’d say about it, too, and worse.

  31. 31
    ThymeZone says:

    Who knows, though? Just because someone is set free after review doesn’t mean he or she isn’t guilty.

    What does it mean, David?

  32. 32
    Kirk Spencer says:

    Weird. I mean, I look upthread about how “all the left” and “all the right” have taken these positions, and then I think back on where I read the first articles saying that the DA’s case was very, very poor, and I wonder when Jeralyn of Talkleft became “the right”?

  33. 33
    Krista says:

    That whole case brought out a lot of ugliness in people. You had some who were basically of the opinion that strippers have no legal right to say no. And then you had some who felt that because it was a bunch of rich white kids, they were automatically guilty. Ugh. Either way, I’ll be glad when it’s finally put to rest.

  34. 34
    ImJohnGalt says:

    I know it’s anecdotal, but I think MKH is full of shit. I’m currently typing this from my in-laws’ place in Raleigh/Durham, and let me tell you, at the Christmas parties we’ve been going to, you couldn’t swing a cat by the tail without hitting a five Republicans. Jesse Helms lives a few doors down, for Christ’s sake! When are Republicans going to quite crying about how victimized they are?

    That said, my wife’s parents, who are lifelong Yellow-Dog Democrats (and one is a Methodist minister) think Nifong should be drawn and quartered, as do many of their friends (who are also Democrats).

  35. 35

    I’m as left as you can get and once the DNA evidence came down it was clear that these guys were innocent and that the DA was using this case to get himself elected.

    The “official left” came out bad on this: the college professors who said that the lacrosse players should be guilty because they were white athletes and rich while the alleged victim was poor and black. Unfortunately, sometimes rich white guys are innocent and poor black women are liars.

    By the way, all the TV talking heads who’ve been saying these kids were guilty are for the most part the same posse that claimed OJ Simpson was guilty, and they used the same tactic: ignoring exculpatory evidence and repeating how vile the accused must be.

    Anyone who still thinks that Simpson committed that double-homicide should go back and read the autopsies and testimony by the coroners. Never happened the way people think it did. Nicole Simpson did not aspirate from her throat wound and did not have any blood in her mouth or sinuses. That is, she wasn’t breathing or bleeding when her throat was cut. Goldman’s wounds are even more telling.

    Next time don’t rely on Geraldo Rivera or Wendy Murphy for your information.

  36. 36
    SeesThroughIt says:

    Does anyone know the generalized political leanings of Duke University?

    I’m not sure what the political leanings are, but the personal deportment leanings of Duke students tend strongly toward “douchebag.”

    Welcome back, OC Steve!

  37. 37
    Zifnab says:

    Next time don’t rely on Geraldo Rivera or Wendy Murphy for your information.

    Idiot announcers not withstanding, OJ was caught with bloody clothes throughout his apartment as well as a ridiculously suspicious time window in which he was available to kill the two. What’s more, even the defense couldn’t come up with any other plausible explanation as to why they were killed or who killed them.

    There were a fair number of suspicious circumstances, but most of those were attributed to the horrendously biased LAPD investigation.

  38. 38

    Zifnab. OJ was not caught with “bloody clothes in his apartment” (nor his house). The only bloody clothes were his socks, which weren’t bloody the day that they were recovered, or the first two times they were jointly examined by the prosecution and defense. You should go back, after you read the autopsy information, and read Scheck’s final summary, which succinctly covers that. It wasn’t reported widely because the news shows and the talking heads all spent that night talking about Fred Goldman’s outburst.

    Reading the autopsies will show you that he didn’t have time to commit the murders. Also, regarding the timeline, you might recall how the day after the murders the Browns told the coroner’s investigator that they’d talked with their daughter at 11 p.m. when Simpson was loading the limo and heading for the airport. Then the Browns changed their story two weeks later to 9:40. Best recollection is right after.

  39. 39
    ThymeZone says:

    Bob, I generally admire your work, but (a) are you really still looking for the real killer? And (b), or two, do you think that’s what OJ was doing as he cruised the 405 in the white Bronco?

  40. 40
    Steve says:

    Also, regarding the timeline, you might recall how the day after the murders the Browns told the coroner’s investigator that they’d talked with their daughter at 11 p.m. when Simpson was loading the limo and heading for the airport. Then the Browns changed their story two weeks later to 9:40. Best recollection is right after.

    “Best recollection is right after”? Okay, you had me going for a bit, but this argument makes it clear that you’re simply spinning the record.

  41. 41
    Zifnab says:

    I mean, I think we all agree that someone killed Ron and Nicole. And OJ certainly had motive.

    But the strange slash marks could easily have been dropped on the bodies by the police to “reinforce” the case.

    But the evidence:

    # DNA analysis of the blood found in, on, and near Simpson’s Bronco revealed traces of Simpson’s, Nicole’s, and Ronald Goldman’s blood.
    # DNA analysis of bloody socks found in Simpson’s bedroom showed the blood to be Nicole’s.
    # Simpson’s hair was found on Goldman’s shirt even though Simpson claimed not to have been at the home and never to have met Goldman.
    # DNA analysis of blood on the gloves was proven to be a mixture of Simpson’s, Nicole’s, and Ronald Goldman’s. The gloves also contained particles of Goldman’s hair and carpet fibers from Simpson’s Bronco.
    # Arrest records indicate that Simpson had been charged with the beating of his wife Nicole. Photos of Nicole’s bruised and battered face emerged. Simpson was sentenced to 3 years of community service for the crime.
    # Police discovered that the dome light in the Bronco had been removed. A search of the vehicle revealed the light was carefully placed under the passenger seat and was in good working condition. Puzzling blood smears on the passenger floorboard indicated that Simpson may have purposely removed the light and placed it under the seat before the murders (assuming he had indeed murdered Brown Simpson and Goldman). Then after the murders he may have unsuccessfully tried to find it to put it back in the socket. Police on stakeouts routinely remove the dome lights from their vehicles to avoid detection when the car doors are opened.

    ~wiki

    still remains substantial.

  42. 42
    ThymeZone says:

    Okay … could Bob in Pacifica actually be OJ?

    A PurposeSpoof?

    Just asking.

  43. 43
    Zifnab says:

    Hey, I’m just saying there’s alot of evidence against him. But there are other theories. Nicole did alot of cocaine and had connections with the mob. OJ’s son had some issues with Nicole and had similiar motives and opportunity.

    It’s not like OJ had to have been the killer. But the proponderance of evidence was against him.

  44. 44
    Darrell says:

    Also, regarding the timeline, you might recall how the day after the murders the Browns told the coroner’s investigator that they’d talked with their daughter at 11 p.m. when Simpson was loading the limo and heading for the airport. Then the Browns changed their story two weeks later to 9:40. Best recollection is right after

    Phone records confirmed that the conversation took place at 9:40.. so no need to rely on anyone’s “best recollection”, right?

  45. 45

    There was no aspiration for Nicole. That is, she didn’t inhale blood when her throat was cut. If she took one breath after her throat was cut she would have inhaled blood because the wound cut all major veins and arteries in her neck back to her spinal column. The cut sliced her epiglottis so she couldn’t prevent blood from squirting into her mouth, nor could she prevent her epiglottis from bleeding. But there was no blood in her mouth or sinuses, the wound in the epiglottis did not even bleed. But she was bled out. How does almost all of her blood leave her body without any going into her mouth or lungs.

    Goldman’s autopsy has similar problems. He was stabbed in the back, the wound reaching the femoral artery which takes blood to the lower extremities. But that wound didn’t kill him because there was negligible blood in her chest cavity. If that was the fatal wound his chest cavity would have continued to fill up with blood until his heart stopped, but there was only about a half cup of blood in his chest cavity.

    Both victims had neck wounds to their jugulars, but it would have taken time for them to have bled out before they died and before the killer could have inflicted those wounds with those results. That is, he would have had to have poked both victims on the the neck, stood around for ten minutes until the victims bled out (presuming that they weren’t still mobile and vocal), then did the ghastly wound on Nicole’s neck. He would have had to have lifted up Goldman after he died, stabbed him, and then set him back down, leaning him against that tree stump. Not the kind of thing that a double-murderer with a plane to catch does at a crime scene in downtown LA.

  46. 46
    Steve says:

    The only bloody clothes were his socks, which weren’t bloody the day that they were recovered, or the first two times they were jointly examined by the prosecution and defense.

    I don’t recall that the prosecution and defense jointly examined the socks twice and found no blood on them. Perhaps you could document this point a little more closely.

  47. 47

    Zifnab:

    1. The blood was not on the socks the day they were recovered, nor the next two times that the prosecution and defense met to review the collected evidence. A month and a half after the murders a lab tech suddenly found a splotch of blood the size of a quarter at the ankle. The blood went through the outside of the sock through the inside to the inside of the other side of the sock, something that wouldn’t have happened if there had been a foot on it when the blood got on it.

    That is, someone poured blood on the sock after the socks were collected, and after they had been examined twice by the prosecutors and defense.

    2. I don’t recall any hair collected was ever demonstrated to have belonged to Simpson (only that it was like Simpson’s hair, like the hair on the watch cap). But if you’ve got a crime lab that has already sprinkled blood on the socks, how hard is it to put a hair on someone’s shirt? When the cops searched Simpson’s house they had access to his bathroom and could have collected as many hairs as they wanted. I guess if you can believe the lab after the socks nothing will convince you otherwise.

    3. By the afternoon of the 13th law enforcement had the blood of both victims and Simpson. Blood sent to labs for testing the next day (collected from the driveway at the Bundy scene) showed blood preservatives, indicating it was blood drawn from Simpson and put in the purple top tube. Lab officials could not account for blood missing from the tube of blood Simpson gave. The swabs sealed on the morning of the 14th smeared the insides of their bindles, meaning that they were wet when placed inside, meaning that either the blood didn’t dry on little pieces of cotton over the course of a day (impossible) or that someone substituted blood the next morning. As Dr. Lee said, how many cockroaches do you find in your spaghetti before you stop eating?

    And the gloves didn’t fit.

    4. I can’t say with certainty that OJ didn’t abuse his wife, but I do know that the prosecution was deliberately exaggerating any history of abuse, based on Detective Edwards’ testimony. Way too much to write here, though. If all spouses who assaulted their spouses went on to kill their spouses there would be a whole lot of widows and widowers in jail. An incident of spousal abuse is not an indicator of double-homicide. Although the press kept reporting nine prior incidents of abuse the only two documented incidents were Edwards’, in the wee hours of New Years Day after the two had returned from a party (with much in Edwards’ story to find unlikely), and Fuhrman’s recollection, written in a police report years after it allegedly occurred. Considering Fuhrman was still rewriting WWII and dressing up in Nazi regalia on weekends, one might posit a motive for him writing a phony report about a black man married to a white woman.

    (By the way, Fuhrman also perjured himself on the stand regarding his whereabouts the evening of the murders.)

    5. Fuhrman broke into the Bronco based on seeing blood which he could not have seen with the vehicle door closed. There’s a likelihood that he himself took out the dome light. By the way, the blood discovered in the Bronco a month and a half after the murders suffered from the same problem as the blood on the socks. It appeared smeared across the dashboard after many people had gone in and out without seeing it.

    Having pointed out the criminal misbehavior of the LAPD, LADA, etc., in that case, you still have to explain the autopsies that contradict Simpson killing his wife and Goldman and then hurrying back to catch his ride to the airport.

    Oh, and the guy who found the wailing Akita changed his story to fit the prosecution’s timeline, as did the Nicole’s parents, who originally said that they’d talked with Nicole at 11 PM, when Simpson was loading up the limo with his driver and heading off to the airport.

    And if anyone thinks that a DA and a group of police can’t foist a false prosecution on the public, just go back and look over what’s been going on in Durham since last March.

  48. 48
    SaleemSinai says:

    Getting back to the Duke case . . . MKH does have a, um, peculiar vantage point, and I don’t know that I’d trust a TownHallian’s perspective as unvarnished.

    I live in Durham, and I knew the people who lived next door to the team’s house. Those guys wreaked havoc on that neighborhood. One story: my friend came home to find a drunken lacrosse player (not one of those charged) pissing on his house. My friend yelled, “Hey! Stop!” and the guy half-turned and said, “No.” That public and widely-known attitude — as well as the team’s appalling arrest records, in which a third of the players had been arrested and charged with various open-container and peace-disturbing violations — made locals ready to believe the worst.

    “Locals” also means “professors,” since many live in that area close to campus. It’s somewhat rough, but appealingly funky and rapidly becoming gentrified.

    And Durham is the place where last year some asshole put up a burning cross less than a mile from my house, so it ain’t all that damn liberal. Just sayin’.

  49. 49
    Darrell says:

    Bob, the problem with untrue consipiracy theories, is that they would require too many people to go along with it, and too many unexplained pieces of evidence get written off to ‘coincidence’.

    FBI testimony said that the cap found at the murder scene had OJ’s hair and fibers from his car. They also testified that OJ’s hair was found on Goldman’s shirt.

    Bloody footprints of OJ’s exact shoe size and italian make were found at the scene. Only like 100 or 200 of this type shoe made.

    Nicole’s blood was found on OJ’s socks

    the bloody glove which OJ says was not his, just happened to be identical to what Nicole bought him for a Christmas present at Bloomingdales a few years earlier. Oh, and the glove found at Nicole’s house was for the left hand, where the right hand glove of the identical type was found at OJ’s house
    OJ had deep cuts on hands. All coincidence? please

    Prior incidents of violence w/Nicole

    And if Furman planted blood in OJ’s bronco, how to explain that blood was in the form of a footprint? Not just blood smears on the dash as you claim. I suppose anything’s possible, but this would be an extreme stretch.

    Too much evidence pointing to OJ to dismiss it as “coincidence” or even planted evidence… even if some were planted, there’s still a mountain of unexplained evidence pointing to him.

  50. 50
    Darrell says:

    as did the Nicole’s parents, who originally said that they’d talked with Nicole at 11 PM, when Simpson was loading up the limo with his driver and heading off to the airport

    Yeah Bob, keep clinging to that one. Actual phone records which OJ’s attorney’s already stipulated were true confirming a 9:40 phone call not 11 as you claim, versus pointing fingers at the memory of someone who just suffered a catestrophic loss. You’re on ‘solid’ ground there, let me tell ya. We can see that you’re arguing in such good faith.

  51. 51
    Steve says:

    A month and a half after the murders a lab tech suddenly found a splotch of blood the size of a quarter at the ankle. The blood went through the outside of the sock through the inside to the inside of the other side of the sock, something that wouldn’t have happened if there had been a foot on it when the blood got on it.

    That is, someone poured blood on the sock after the socks were collected, and after they had been examined twice by the prosecutors and defense.

    The blood on the socks had a higher DNA count than the blood in Nicole Simpson’s autopsy vial. That means it was fresher. It is scientifically impossible that the blood on the sock got there as a result of someone splashing the autopsy vial on it, nor is it likely that fresh Nicole Simpson blood was available from any other source months after she was killed.

    The defense did a masterful job of manufacturing reasonable doubt out of gaps in the chain of custody and errors in procedure by the cops and the crime lab. The verdict may have even been correct in the sense that the State failed to do what it should have to establish the defendant’s guilt. But we mustn’t mistake that for proof that the blood got on the sock as some sort of calculated frame-up, because it’s very clear as a matter of science that that didn’t happen.

  52. 52
    Darrell says:

    The verdict may have even been correct in the sense that the State failed to do what it should have to establish the defendant’s guilt.

    Inept prosecution to be sure. But they still presented a mountain of DNA evidence, much of which the defense offered no plausible explanation.

    If you’re going to point fingers at the ineptness of the prosecutors, the jurors were far worse.. taking like 3 hours to decide, ignoring the mountain of DNA evidence

    “I didn’t understand the DNA stuff at all. To me, it was just a waste of time. It was way out there and carried no weight with me.”

  53. 53
    SaleemSinai says:

    Oops . . . guess I stepped onto the thread topic highway and got run over by a white Ford Bronco driven by “A.C., dammit!”

    Nice to know that O.J. psychosis is still thriving. I mean, seriously, y’all, it’s been *eleven* *years*.

    One more Duke-lacrosse-case observation: Nifong would have been handily re-elected if he had just halfway pretended to investigate this case. The “60 Minutes” piece on this story said several times that he faced a “hotly contested” race, but that’s not true. I can’t remember a time when an incumbent DA in Durham lost an election.

    I don’t think this was a pernicious attempt to pander to masochistic liberal whites and triumphalist blacks. Seems more like not-atypical DA over-reaching to me, and the response on the right can be chalked up to identifying too strongly with the accused. I mean, who *hasn’t* said he would shove a broomstick up a stripper’s ass?

  54. 54
    ThymeZone says:

    If I agree with Darrell, is it better to do so silently, to wallow in my shame in private … or is it better to confess it openly and cleanse myself through public repentence?

  55. 55
    ThymeZone says:

    Hypothetically, I mean.

  56. 56
    TenguPhule says:

    ThymeZone Says:

    If I agree with Darrell, is it better to do so silently, to wallow in my shame in private … or is it better to confess it openly and cleanse myself through public repentence?

    Even a stopped clock can be right twice a day. There is no shame in recognizing that.

  57. 57
    ThymeZone says:

    There is no shame in recognizing that.

    Bless you.

  58. 58
    demimondian says:

    Besides, TZ, Darrell has referred to me as “an informed letie” at least once. You don’t have to live with *that* shame.

  59. 59
    ThymeZone says:

    Darrell has referred to me as “an informed letie” at least once.

    God, I’m sorry man. I had no idea.

    You gotta just move past that.

  60. 60
    Steve says:

    Of all the ways I could spend my Boxing Day, I never imagined I would spend it relitigating the OJ case.

Comments are closed.