Police attempted more dorm searches Thursday? (Signifying Nothing: how does saying nothing at all become so loud?)

Friday, 14 April 2006

Police attempted more dorm searches Thursday?

From the AP:

Police attempted to search the dorm rooms of Duke University lacrosse players amid an investigation into the alleged rape of an exotic dancer at a team party, the school’s president said Friday.

President Richard Brodhead said he was just learning about the Thursday night search attempts and didn’t have many details, including whether investigators had search warrants and if they actually entered any rooms.

“I am aware that police attempted to enter those rooms, and I am now about to leave this news conference to learn the whole story,” Brodhead said.

There were no warrants for any dorm rooms at Duke among those returned to the Durham County magistrate’s office Friday morning, although police have 48 hours after executing a warrant to return it. The court clerk’s office was closed for the Good Friday holiday. Police said they would not release any information Friday.

Defense attorney Joe Cheshire, who represents one of the team’s captains, said he didn’t know anything about the searches, but called them a waste of time.

“Now, whether there are other issues as to it relates to issues like drinking and partying and those things, I’ve got no clue,” Cheshire said. “But if it relates to sexual assault, they can search ‘til the cows come home.”

WRAL further indicates that “police were trying to question some players Thursday, but that there was no warrant for a search of players’ rooms” according to defense attorneys.

At present, it is unclear what police were looking for, although one could speculate that they are trying to find copies of the photos the defense has claimed are exculpatory (but has not shown or released to the public); presumably any incriminating evidence would have been removed or destroyed in the month since the party.

It may also be another dimension of what some have believed is an effort to intimidate the lacrosse team members; Thursday’s edition of The Abrams Report on MSNBC reported that an email was sent to about half of the lacrosse team that appeared to be from one of the other players who claimed he was going to police. The email was believed to be a forgery because it was dated April 14th (today) and the player in question was apparently in class at the time it was sent, according to his attorney.

Finally, if you thought the Tawana Bradley comparisons were premature, the news that a key figure in that case may be paying Durham a visit might change your views somewhat:

The Rev. Al Sharpton, the New York City-based civil-rights activist, may visit Durham in the next few days to speak out on allegations that a black woman was raped last month by members of Duke University’s lacrosse team.

As of Thursday afternoon, Sharpton hadn’t scheduled a visit. But he had been invited to make the trip by “local community members and pastors,” said Rachel Noerdlinger, the minister’s spokeswoman.

Noerdlinger said Sharpton’s travel plans “are just being shaped” and that the proposed trip to Durham was “under strong consideration.”

Update: John in Carolina is none too thrilled that Sharpton may be headed to the Bull City.

6 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 @ Fri, 14 Apr 2006, 1:20 pm CDT:

Chris, suppose you are one of the jurors. What kind of evidence would convince you that the rape did not happen, that it could be ruled out?

Because it appears that whatever evidence there is that support the players’ story is dismissed by DA and many others.

No DNA – they used condoms, DNA doesn’t mean much anyway.
Photographs – could be manipulated.
911 call – it doesn’t matter.
Inconsistencies in her and other woman’s story – it also doesn’t matter.
And so on.

I mean, what kind of evidence there sould be to prove they didn’ t do it? And do they have to prove anything anyway? It appears if one is accused, there is no way to clear one’s name. If you didn’t do such type of crime, what kind of evidence you might have?

Or DA has to solidly prove they did it? Right now he has nothing.

2. John wrote @ Fri, 14 Apr 2006, 1:59 pm CDT:

Only the DA decides what evidence will be presented, although the jurors can ask questions, and in a case like this, most will know questions to ask about facts that normally would be unknown to them. It is well known in the legal community that the grand jury is a rubber stamp for the prosecution. Usually, when there is no bill of indictment, it results from the DA deliberately presenting evidence in such a way that the grand jury will not indict—to take the pressure of the DA in a politically charged case that he does not want to try. IMHO, Nifong believes he cannot withstand a “no bill” in this case, and the grand jury will indict. On the other hand, if no indictment is returned, it is highly likely that that was the intended result.

3. Chris Lawrence wrote @ Fri, 14 Apr 2006, 2:05 pm CDT:

Igor: I don’t know that Nifong has a provable case at this point; you don’t have to be certain a rape didn’t occur to believe that the case is not provable in a court of law.

On the basis of the evidence as it stands now, assuming the photos from the party are as described by the defense, I’d have a hard time convicting anyone of rape or battery; that doesn’t mean, however, that I’m absolutely certain no rape or battery happened.

4. Simon Spero wrote @ Fri, 14 Apr 2006, 3:21 pm CDT:

According to WPTF yesterday, Sharpton isn’t coming, which would have proved the players innocence. Indeed, hiring Bob Bennet may actually cause DNA evidence to spontaneously generate.

The DA currently has the prosecutix’s statements, which reportedly include identification of two persons, and the report of the SANE, which was enough to persuade a magistrate that there was probable cause to believe a crime had been committed (required as part of obtaining the non-testimonial orders. That’s enough to support a conviction, but may not be enough to get one.

I haven’t seen any information about the results of any tox screen, but I believe that one would have been performed as part of the forensic examination, and should be a matter of some interest to the defence.

I would be suprised if the timestamps on the photos would be admissible, as they would seem to be hearsay.

BTW, this is an informative general reference, though it’s Michigan specific so not everything applies to NC: Michigan Justice Institute – Sexual Assault Benchbook

5. Igor wrote @ Fri, 14 Apr 2006, 4:09 pm CDT:

Chris, it just seems to me that the accusation of rape is easy to make, and very difficult to fight against. At it is surely costly. ( to players’ parents anyway).

Dan Abrams (of MSNBC) just reported that the victim might have changed her story – she was not raped for 30 min, but maybe like 3 min.

6. Chris Lawrence wrote @ Fri, 14 Apr 2006, 4:48 pm CDT:

Simon: Abrams reported that one of the players’ watches is visible in a photo and corresponds with the alleged time the picture was taken; presumably forensics could be done to at least investigate whether or not the flash memory was rewritten. I don’t know what that says about admissability.

And, heh on the Bennett reference. I hazily see a blue dress in someone’s future.

Igor: True enough.

Comments are now closed on this post.