Duke under siege, day fourteen: defense claims photos exculpatory (Signifying Nothing: how does saying nothing at all become so loud?)

Sunday, 9 April 2006

Duke under siege, day fourteen: defense claims photos exculpatory

Sunday’s Herald-Sun reports that attorneys for players accused in the Duke lacrosse rape case have photos taken at the party that contradict the victim’s account of events:

The photos show the woman attempting to get back inside the house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. where the attack allegedly occurred on the night of March 13–14, said attorney Bill Thomas, who represents one of the lacrosse players.

“She had a big smile on her face,” Thomas said.

Then the woman fell down at the back door of the house and lay on the ground “for quite some time” as if she were intoxicated or asleep, Thomas added.

In addition, the time-stamped photos indicate the woman was severely bruised on her legs and face, and had cuts on her legs, knees and feet when she arrived at the home—and before the rape allegedly occurred—Thomas said.

One wonders if the photos siezed by the police in their two searches are consistent with—or contradict—these. Without some serious forensic investigation of the source media, forging the timestamps on pictures to make them look like they were taken at a time other than when they actually were is almost trivial. And even if the woman did arrive at the party with visible bruising and cuts, that doesn’t necessarily mean she wasn’t raped at the party.

Another story looks at the trial-by-media atmosphere surrounding the case.

At the Herald-Sun’s competitor, in the silence of Righteous Townie DA Mike Nifong, the News & Observer tries its hand at a bit of jury tampering of its own:

But taken as a body of work, the charges track the noisy passage of a championship lacrosse team with a reputation for a swaggering sense of entitlement and privilege. They underscore the hard-drinking image of the Duke lacrosse team—which some residents say is a super-sized version of the university’s elitist, party-hearty ethos.

“There is a culture at Duke of an entitlement to be drunk in the evenings and on the weekends,” said Robert Panoff, a former Notre Dame club lacrosse player who has lived for more than a decade in Trinity Park, the neighborhood on the edge of Duke’s east campus where the lacrosse team captains lived.

“That’s the attitude that pervades the Duke campus, and it’s not just the lacrosse team,” said Panoff, founder and executive director of a nonprofit research and education organization. “There is a particular swagger at Duke. Is there a particular machismo and variation of that swagger on the lacrosse team? Absolutely.”

Panoff is quick to point out that lacrosse is not a monolithic culture. But for other Durham residents, the lacrosse imbroglio has raised racial tensions.

15 comments:

Any views expressed in these comments are solely those of their authors; they do not reflect the views of the authors of Signifying Nothing, unless attributed to one of us.

1. Igor wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 2:37 am CDT:

Interesting. Who would have thought that a whore could have fabricated such story? :) I wonder what wacko-feminists at the site like Alas (http://www.amptoons.com/blog/) would say now?

2. Chris Lawrence wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 3:03 am CDT:

I wouldn’t necessarily jump to the conclusion that the whole story is a fabrication; as I pointed out, it’s possible that she was raped even if she arrived with these injuries, and it’s also possible that the photos are genuine but the timestamps have been altered to make potentially incriminating photos look exculpatory. (The fact that the attorneys aren’t giving copies of the photos to the Herald-Sun, for example, is a bit of a red flag.)

3. Igor wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 8:46 am CDT:

Weel, attorneys are reluctand to give photos at this moment and thus disclose the identity of the accuser because of the rape victim shield laws. But I wonder how long do thet have to be. Soon she may need a lawer herself. :)

4. Chris Lawrence wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 8:55 am CDT:

Igor: I doubt the rape shield laws would be at issue here, since the Herald-Sun already knows the identity of the victim.

5. JB wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 3:50 pm CDT:

I thought something was a little funny last week when the DA said he was “fairly confident” a rape had occurred.

These photos don’t prove or disprove rape, but if they completely undermine parts of the girl’s story, plus the timeline disparity is large enough, you have a much more difficult rape case to prove.

The basic rule to remember: never put anything past anybody. None of us were there when this happened . . .

6. Igor wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 8:15 pm CDT:

Chris,

“the timestamps have been altered to make potentially incriminating photos look exculpatory”

Well, if the pictures are still in the cameras, then how do you change timestamps? I think newspaper said that the fact that the photos are not tempered with was established.

Do you think it is possible that they might have some scuffle with her, and would settle out of court? That makes me wonder if she had the monetary compensation in mind when she started the whole thing? If the rape thing does not work, at least battery charges might bring in some cash?

7. Chris Lawrence wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 8:36 pm CDT:

The photos on digital cameras are normally stored on a removable memory card; that card could be attached directly to a computer and altered. Without detailed forensic analysis of the card itself, or something in the photos themselves that indicates the time they were taken (like clocks in the background), it would be easy to fake the times—and assemble a fictitious timeline from real photos.

Any civil lawsuit would be separate from the criminal case; obviously it would help her make a civil case if there were rape and battery convictions, but that isn’t strictly necessary; OJ lost the civil case and had to pay damages even after being acquitted in the criminal murder case. She could also sue even if no charges are filed.

8. Igor wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 11:10 pm CDT:

If the timestamps are of the kind that appears on the photos themselves – i don’t think it is possible to change them in a way that defy detection of such action. At least not possible for an average student.

After all, if you think pictures could be manipulated (via computer graphics) to change the timestamps, the clocks in the background could be altered in the same way also.

9. Igor wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 11:34 pm CDT:

Also, I don’t know if you blogged about that, but some bloggers point out that the story that victim’s father was telling about conditon of his daughter has been changing with each interview – from no injuries to severe ones.

10. Chris Lawrence wrote @ Sun, 9 Apr 2006, 11:42 pm CDT:

The timestamps don’t physically appear on the photos like they would in a film camera; instead, they are stored digitally in another part of the file from the image data. Forging the image part of a digital camera photo is much harder than altering the timestamp; there would be visible artifacts (strange blotches of color, etc.) from the decompression and recompression of the image unless it was done by a real pro.

See this photo for an example; the dates appear in the EXIF data in the right-hand column, while if you look at the actual picture on the left the date itself is nowhere to be seen.

11. Igor wrote @ Mon, 10 Apr 2006, 12:09 am CDT:

I know about EXIF date. But aren’t there some photos that have the date/ time visible on the picture itself? Or maybe I think about video?

Yes, I agree, altering EXIF data would be possible.

12. AmishHitman wrote @ Mon, 10 Apr 2006, 10:55 am CDT:

Plain and simple – a major Bonehead Move…

No matter what, these guys (rape or not) should pay in more ways then one.

A smear as this reflects more then just the sore eye given to Duke Lax –it blackens the eye of student athlete’s as a whole.

Yet another time where collage athletes loose focus on the real reason of why and what they are attending school for.

Underage drinking – strippers at a party – nice move…NOT!

Hey Duke Lacrosse – way-to-go and really represent a great sport – you should be proud.

Way to go…boneheads

13. azballer wrote @ Tue, 11 Apr 2006, 5:30 pm CDT:

I don’t see why everyone is getting on Duke for being “elitist”. Please – “elistist”?

Duke is a good small private college. I’ve never met anyone from Duke who comes across as “elite”.

Please -

14. MissMerlisa wrote @ Fri, 14 Apr 2006, 6:31 pm CDT:

Captains of team should be suspended at best. It’s hard to expect a 17, 18 or 19-year-old to say no to the team captain who has offered them booze and naked women. These guys hosted a party on school property, in the middle of the season and supplied their younger teammates with booze and strippers.

Odd that they say she was smiling at the door, but so drunk she was passed out and instead of getting help, they all took photos? Sounds strange. Something happened. I think all involved (the woman and the guys) are not telling the whole truth.

15. Chris Lawrence wrote @ Fri, 14 Apr 2006, 6:42 pm CDT:

Re, #14: In fairness, the house was “school property” only because it was bought out from under the leaseholders a month earlier; it is not even managed directly by the university at present. The fact it was school property is basically immaterial in this case.

But, yes, I would expect that the young men who leased the house and were at the party will be punished by the university—at least the ones who have not graduated.

Comments are now closed on this post.